A Global Collaboration to Study Intimate Partner Violence-Related Head Trauma: The ENIGMA Consortium IPV Working Group
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Intimate partner violence includes psychological aggression, physical violence, sexual violence, and stalking from a current or former intimate partner. Past research suggests that exposure to intimate partner violence can impact cognitive and psychological functioning, as well as neurological outcomes. These seem to be compounded in those who suffer a brain injury as a result of trauma to the head, neck or body due to physical and/or sexual violence. However, our understanding of the neurobehavioral and neurobiological effects of head trauma in this population is limited due to factors including difficulty in accessing/recruiting participants, heterogeneity of samples, and premorbid and comorbid factors that impact outcomes. Thus, the goal of the Enhancing Neuroimaging and Genetics through Meta-Analysis (ENIGMA) Consortium Intimate Partner Violence Working Group is to develop a global collaboration that includes researchers, clinicians, and other key community stakeholders. Participation in the working group can include collecting harmonized data, providing data for meta- and mega-analysis across sites, or stakeholder insight on key clinical research questions, promoting safety, participant recruitment and referral to support services. Further, to facilitate the mega-analysis of data across sites within the working group, we provide suggestions for behavioral surveys, cognitive tests, neuroimaging parameters, and genetics that could be used by investigators in the early stages of study design. We anticipate that the harmonization of measures across sites within the working group prior to data collection could increase the statistical power in characterizing how intimate partner violence-related head trauma impacts long-term physical, cognitive, and psychological health.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.126 | 0.109 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.019 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.003 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".