MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

BEGINNING TO UNDERSTAND THE ECONOMIC COSTS OF CHILDREN’S EXPOSURE TO INTIMATE PARTNER VIOLENCE

2014· article· en· W4247255662 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Martin A. Andresen, Shannon J. Linning

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Child Youth and Family Studies · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIntimate Partner and Family Violence
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDomestic violencePsychologyCriminologyEnvironmental healthHuman factors and ergonomicsPoison controlMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Intimate partner violence comprises 37% of violent crime in Canada, imposing significant economic costs on society. Childhood exposure to intimate partner violence is a well-documented phenomenon, but the resulting costs are less understood. Some research has found that children exposed to intimate partner violence are at a greater risk of developing health and behavioural problems that potentially impact these children as well as society as a whole. However, there is no known estimate of the economic costs of this exposure to intimate partner violence. In this paper, we develop a simple model to estimate these costs. We estimate that each year there are approximately 125,000 new children exposed to intimate partner violence generating a yearly economic cost to society of $759 million for that one cohort of children in Canada. Over a period of 10 years, this one cohort would impose an economic cost of $7.0 billion, and this is substantially underestimated because it does not include the new sets of children exposed to intimate partner violence each year. As such, the potential for societal economic cost savings resulting from the prevention of intimate partner violence is significant.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.767
Threshold uncertainty score0.468

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.296 · 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 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

Citations3
Published2014
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Child Youth and Family StudiesSame topicIntimate Partner and Family ViolenceFrench-language works237,207