Examining the Effectiveness, Acceptability, and Feasibility of Virtually Delivered Trauma-Focused Domestic Violence and Sexual Violence Interventions: A Rapid Evidence Assessment
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The COVID-19 pandemic has forced a rapid shift to virtual delivery of treatment and care to individuals affected by domestic violence and sexual violence. A rapid evidence assessment (REA) was undertaken to examine the effectiveness, feasibility and acceptability of trauma-focused virtual interventions for persons affected by domestic violence and sexual violence. The findings from this review will provide guidance for service providers and organizational leaders with the implementation of virtual domestic violence and sexual violence-focused interventions. The REA included comprehensive search strategies and systematic screening of and relevant articles. Papers were included into this review (1) if they included trauma-focused interventions; (2) if the intervention was delivered virtually; and (3) if the article was published in the English-language. Twenty-one papers met inclusion criteria and were included for analysis. Findings from the rapid review demonstrate that virtual interventions that incorporate trauma-focused treatment are scarce. Online interventions that incorporate trauma-focused treatment for this at-risk group are limited in scope, and effectiveness data are preliminary in nature. Additionally, there is limited evidence of acceptability, feasibility and effectiveness of virtual interventions for ethnically, culturally, and linguistically diverse populations experiencing domestic violence and sexual violence. Accessing virtual interventions was also highlighted as a barrier to among participants in studies included in the review. Despite the potential of virtual interventions to respond to the needs of individuals affected by domestic violence and/or sexual violence, the acceptability and effectiveness of virtual trauma-focused care for a diverse range of populations at risk of violence are significantly understudied.
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 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 | 0.015 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 it