Intimate Partner Violence against Mastectomized Women: Victims’ Experiences
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Exposure to situations of domestic violence during the treatment for breast cancer may compromise the treatment and quality of life of women patients, so it is essential that health professionals act in tracking this phenomenon in the approach to and care of women with breast cancer. The purpose of this study was to examine experiences of violence against women by their intimate partners after mastectomy. This is an exploratory descriptive study, with a qualitative approach, carried out in the Rehabilitation Program for Mastectomized Women in a Brazilian reference hospital for oncological treatment. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 16 mastectomized women. For data analysis, a content analysis technique was performed. The women interviewed were predominantly brown, with a minimum age of 44 years and maximum of 72 years. They presented with low education, were married, and had a mean period of five years of breast cancer diagnosis. The participants reported that after mastectomy, they experienced episodes of violence at a time when they were extremely vulnerable due to the various cancer treatments. Three major thematic categories emerged from interview data across the data collection: (1) experiences of psychological violence, (2) experiences of physical violence, and (3) experiences of sexual violence. Psychological violence took the form of humiliation and contempt for their condition. Physical violence involved assault and sexual violence in the form of forced sex by coercion. Violence was a phenomenon present after mastectomy, practiced in the domestic environment by the intimate partner. We emphasize the importance of health professionals in screening for this issue by listening to and welcoming women, recording cases, exposing this situation, and contributing to prevention.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".