MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2962317869 · doi:10.1177/1049732319857671

System Entrapment: Dehumanization While Help-Seeking for Suicidality in Women Who Have Experienced Intimate Partner Violence

2019· article· en· W2962317869 on OpenAlexaffabout
Petrea Taylor

Bibliographic record

VenueQualitative Health Research · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIntimate Partner and Family Violence
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEmpathyDehumanizationPsychologyHarmPhotovoiceDomestic violenceFeelingQualitative researchPoison controlEmpowermentGrounded theorySocial psychologySuicide preventionClinical psychologyPsychiatryMedicineMedical emergencySociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Attention to power imbalances when seeking help for suicidality after having been controlled within intimate partner violence (IPV) is crucial in improving health care delivery. Well documented in the literature is the correlation between suicidality and IPV and that help-seeking for each is difficult; however, a gap exists when both intersect. The process of women’s help-seeking is explored in this feminist grounded theory and photovoice multiple qualitative method study. Analysis of interviews with 32 women from New Brunswick, Canada, and photovoice meetings with seven women revealed a basic psycho-social problem. System Entrapment or being dehumanized while seeking help for suicidality occurred as a result of perceived invalidation from health care providers’ lack of empathy. Further harm while providing services to women feeling suicidal can be prevented with a shift from an individualist model toward a trauma and violence informed approach. Understanding the contextual factors influencing women’s suicidality may reduce victim blaming.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.026
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.279
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0260.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.245
GPT teacher head0.541
Teacher spread0.296 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations20
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueQualitative Health ResearchSame topicIntimate Partner and Family ViolenceFrench-language works237,207