‘‘A journey back to my wholeness’’: A qualitative metasynthesis on the relational and sexual recovery process of child sexual abuse survivors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: This study aims to document the relational and sexual recovery process of child sexual abuse (CSA) survivors. Method: Using the framework-based synthesis approach (Dixon-Woods, 2011), a metasynthesis was conducted on qualitative peer-reviewed studies published between 2004 and 2019, focusing on the recovery from relational and sexual outcomes related to CSA experiences. Criteria of inclusion: 1) included self-identified men or women who had sustained sexual abuse in childhood; 2) focused on CSA related relational or sexual outcomes and recovery processes; 3) included a qualitative component incorporating interviews or focus groups; 4) were carried out in Western countries. According to these criteria, a sample of eight articles was constituted. A direct content analysis was performed using The Drive to Move Forward Framework (Ochocka et al., 2005). Results: Findings yielded three main categories that illustrate the relational and sexual recovery process of CSA survivors: 1) The Drive to Move Forward after CSA; 2) Positive Strategies Mobilized to Recover from Relational and Sexual Issues Left by CSA and; 3) Social Circumstances that Facilitate or Hinder the Relational and Sexual Recovery Process. Conclusion: Although their relational and sexual recovery process may involve setbacks, and that they may be confronted with impeding social circumstances, survivors mobilize strategies and social resources to help them move forward after CSA. Implication: In order to help CSA survivors in achieving a satisfying relational and sexual life, providers should adopt a personalized approach that respects their process of relational and sexual recovery and adopt an ecological perspective to better understand the factors that can modulate this process.
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 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 | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".