The Validity of the ODARA in Australian Intimate Partner Violence Cases Without Prior Assault/Credible Threat or Cohabitation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study investigated whether the Ontario Domestic Assault Risk Assessment (ODARA) is effective in the assessment of risk in male intimate partner violence (IPV) cases that do not meet the inclusion criteria used in the ODARA’s development sample (presence of prior assault or threat by perpetrator and previous cohabitation with the victim). Australian police scored the ODARA in 275 IPV cases without one or both of these characteristics, with results contrasted to performance in 200 cases meeting both inclusion criteria. The ODARA demonstrated poor discriminant effect over time for both assault and abuse recurrence in the former group (concordance index [c-index] = 0.56 and c-index = 0.57, respectively), but performed well in the latter group (c-index = 0.69 and c-index = 0.69). Although subject to some significant methodological limitations and requiring replication, these findings suggest the ODARA may not provide accurate risk-based classification if applied to cases missing the inclusion criteria.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".