MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4205514353 · doi:10.1097/htr.0000000000000749

Prevalence and Perception of Intimate Partner Violence-Related Traumatic Brain Injury

2022· article· en· W4205514353 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Head Trauma Rehabilitation · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIntimate Partner and Family Violence
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReferralDomestic violenceTraumatic brain injuryPerceptionPoison controlOccupational safety and health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is a serious and often undiagnosed consequence of intimate partner violence (IPV). Data on prevalence of TBI among IPV survivors are emerging, but prevalence of IPV among patients presenting to TBI clinics is unknown. Identification of IPV is important to ensure patients with TBI receive appropriate intervention and referrals. OBJECTIVE: To determine the proportion of women 18 years and older presenting to an acquired brain injury (ABI) clinic with confirmed or suspected concussion who reported experiencing IPV in the last 12 months or their lifetime. METHODS: Single-center cross-sectional cohort study. Proportion of IPV-related TBI or head, neck, or facial) injuries were determined using a modified HELPS Brain Injury Screening Tool and the Neurobehavioral Symptom Inventory. RESULTS: Of the 97 women approached, 50 were enrolled in the study. The average age was 46.1 years and 32 women (64.0%) reported a relationship history with a violent partner; 12-month prevalence of IPV was 26.5% and lifetime prevalence was 44.0%. Within their lifetime, all (44.0%) who reported an IPV history reported emotional abuse, 24.0% reported physical abuse, and 18.0% sexual abuse. HELPS responses indicated a high potential of lifetime IPV-related TBI for 29.2%, most commonly from being hit in the face or head (20.8%). CONCLUSION: Implementation of IPV screening in community-based ABI clinics is a pivotal step toward understanding the potential scope of TBI and addressing the wide range of somatic, cognitive, and affective symptoms experienced by IPV survivors. IPV screening also will lead to timely referral and follow-up and increase patient safety after discharge from rehabilitation.

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 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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.762
Threshold uncertainty score0.426

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.326 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations20
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Head Trauma RehabilitationSame topicIntimate Partner and Family ViolenceFrench-language works237,207