Intimate Partner Violence Against Women in the Arab Countries: A Systematic Review of Risk Factors
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
Intimate partner violence (IPV) profoundly damages physical, sexual, reproductive, and psychological health, as well as social well-being of individuals and families. We sought in this systematic review to examine the risk factors according to the integrative ecological theoretical framework for IPV for women living in the Arab countries. We searched Embase, PubMed, PsycINFO, and SCOPUS, supplemented by hand searching of reference lists. A research strategy was developed and observational studies were included if they considered female participants (age ≥13) in heterosexual relationships, estimates of potential risk factors of IPV, and IPV as a primary outcome. We conducted a narrative synthesis of the risk factors data from 30 cross-sectional studies. Factors associated with increased IPV against women were extracted and categorized into four levels according to the updated integrative ecological model. At the individual level, risk factors were either related to victims or perpetrators of IPV. Factors relating to marriage, conflict within the family, etc., were explored and included within the family level, whereas factors relating to the extended family and the nature of marriage were included in the community level. Finally, risk factors relating to the cultural context that are influenced by the political and religious backgrounds were included in the societal level. The complex structure of violence against women in the Arab world calls for socioculturally sensitive interventions, which should be accompanied by systematic and structured work aimed at improving Arab women’s status at all levels.
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 | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 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 it