Perceptions of War Trauma and Healing of Marital Relations Among Torture‐surviving Congolese Couples Participating in Multicouple Therapy
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Citizens of the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) experienced widespread torture during national wars between 1998 and 2003. Couples who survived and stayed intact suffered tremendous relationship stress. This study used a critical ethnography framework to explore the prewar, wartime, and postwar experiences of 13 torture-surviving couples who participated in a 10-session Torture-Surviving Couple Group in 2008 in the DRC. The group was designed to address the relational effects of torture and war trauma. Participants reported profound negative effects of the war on their relationships; mostly positive experiences during the group, including marital and peer connection and relationship growth; and a number of improvements in their relationship after the group. Implications include support for the use of relational interventions informed by both treatments for traumatic stress and couple approaches to promote trauma healing. Future directions call for increased funding, research, training, and clinical action to treat the effects of traumatic stress on relational family dynamics.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it