MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3102457850 · doi:10.1007/s10896-020-00212-x

Intimate Partner Violence and COVID-19 in Rural, Remote, and Northern Canada: Relationship, Vulnerability and Risk

2020· review· en· W3102457850 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Family Violence · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIntimate Partner and Family Violence
Canadian institutionsWestern UniversityUniversity of British ColumbiaSaskatchewan HealthUniversity of AlbertaAurora College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDomestic violenceVulnerability (computing)FemicidePandemicSuicide preventionPoison controlService providerCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)CriminologyHuman factors and ergonomicsService (business)PsychologySocioeconomicsPolitical scienceBusinessSociologyEnvironmental healthComputer securityMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In rural, remote, and northern parts of Canada, the pre-existing vulnerability and risk for intimate partner violence has been exacerbated by COVID-19. The purpose of this commentary is to identify the unique impact of COVID-19 on intimate partner violence both in terms of the bearing on those experiencing abuse and on the service sector in rural, remote and northern communities where the rates of intimate partner violence and intimate partner femicide pre-pandemic are higher than in larger cities. The recommendations offered in this paper include enhanced safety planning, alternate housing for victims fleeing violence, and suggestions for service providers. We also offer ways to move forward with further research in the COVID-19 era.

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 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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.935
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.065
GPT teacher head0.378
Teacher spread0.313 · 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