Developing and testing a readiness tool for interpersonal violence prevention partnerships with community‐based projects
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
Community-based projects that serve vulnerable families have the opportunity to identify and respond to interpersonal violence (IPV). We developed a readiness assessment tool to support selection of projects to participate in an initiative that involved implementing a community-based IPV intervention for mothers. The overarching aim of the current study was to describe the development of this tool and examine the reliability of coding, validity, and utility of the tool. After developing and refining the tool, 41 community-based projects completed the tool. Responses were coded and scored; scores were used to select projects for the initiative. Preliminary validation for the tool included (a) expert opinion, (b) uptake/implementation of the intervention, and (c) feedback and responses from service providers in terms of the usefulness and importance of the tool. This tool can be used by both researchers and service providers to assess community project readiness and capacity to provide trauma-informed services for vulnerable families.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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