Exploration of barriers to screening for domestic violence in the perinatal period using an ecological framework
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: To explore Australian healthcare providers' perspectives on factors that influence disclosure and domestic violence screening through the lens of Heise's (1998) integrated ecological framework. DESIGN: This paper reports the findings that were part of a sequential mixed methods study with survey data informing interview questions. Participants for interviews were recruited after expressing an interest after completing surveys, as well as via snowball sampling. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were undertaken in 2017 with 12 practicing healthcare providers delivering care to women in the perinatal period in Greater Western Sydney, NSW, Australia. Data were analysed using Braun and Clarke's (2006) six-step thematic approach. FINDINGS: The findings were framed within Heise's integrated ecological framework under four main themes. The main themes were 'Ontogenic: Factors preventing women from disclosing'; 'Microsystem: Factors preventing healthcare providers from asking'; 'Exosystem: Organizational structures not conducive to screening'; and 'Macrosystem: Cultural attitudes and socioeconomic influences affecting screening'. CONCLUSION: Organizational policies are needed for better systems of reminding healthcare providers to enquire for domestic and family violence and mandating this within their practices. Mandatory domestic and family violence education and training that is suitable for the time constraints and learning needs of the healthcare provider is recommended for all healthcare providers caring for perinatal women. Further research is needed in addressing culturally specific barriers for healthcare providers to enquire about domestic and family violence in a culturally appropriate way. PUBLIC AND PATIENT ENGAGEMENT AND INVOLVEMENT IN RESEARCH (PPEI): No Patient or Public Contribution was embedded into the research reported in this paper as this research was specifically exploring healthcare providers' perspectives on domestic violence screening within their own practice experience.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".