Intimate Partner Violence Against Indigenous Men in Heterosexual Relationships: Toward a Culturally Safe Response in Primary Health Care Settings
Bibliographic record
Abstract

 
 
 Most Indigenous intimate partner violence (IPV) research and interventions are geared toward women, while the experiences of Indigenous men as survivors of IPV are not well investigated or understood. Indigenous men are typically portrayed as perpetrators of violence yet very seldom as survivors of violence, although they experience disproportionately high rates of violence, including IPV, when compared to non-Indigenous men. Our community-based participatory research, conducted in partnership with First Nations communities in Northern Ontario, Canada, completed in 2019, identified this bias as a major barrier for Indigenous men to disclose IPV in a health service setting, where a safe space and support should be available. The primary health care providers involved in this study reported awareness of serious abuse perpetrated against First Nations men in heterosexual relationships. However, they also cited insufficient preparedness within the primary care system to respond to the needs of these men, including significant gaps in culturally safe services. These findings warrant attention and action. We offer recommendations for health and social services and community organizations to help address, in culturally safe ways, IPV experienced by Indigenous men and its effects on families and communities.
 
 
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 | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".