MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4242195894 · doi:10.32920/ryerson.14658072.v1

Their stories matter: understanding the experiences of spousal abuse among Ghanaian women in Toronto, Canada

2021· preprint· en· W4242195894 on OpenAlexaffabout
Stephanie Asare

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMigration, Health and Trauma
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSilenceDomestic violenceQualitative researchMental healthCoping (psychology)Psychological resiliencePsychologyPsychiatryMedicineSuicide preventionSocial psychologyPoison controlSociologyEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The issue of spousal abuse among immigrant women in Toronto and the silence surrounding it is important to address because it is a problem that is often trivialized. This qualitative study involves semi-structured interviews with 10 intergenerational Ghanaian women living in the Greater Toronto Area who have been affected by spousal abuse. The interviews focused on their experiences, coping strategies, and the resources that helped or could have been helpful in their healing process. The study results indicate that there is a connection between spousal abuse and the development of depression, which confirms the findings from previous literature on spousal abuse. In addition, the study results also reveal that the lack of accessible information abroad was a barrier towards seeking help. Recommendations that may help Ghanaian women living in the Greater Toronto Area seek and utilize formal support and counselling services are presented. Key words: Access to services, Ghanaian women, mental health, resilience, spousal abuse

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.233
Threshold uncertainty score0.468

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0200.012
Scholarly communication0.0050.002
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.268 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMigration, Health and Trauma→French-language works237,207→