MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4360612695 · doi:10.1186/s12905-023-02248-9

Exposure to interparental violence and justification of intimate partner violence among women in Papua New Guinea

2023· article· en· W4360612695 on OpenAlexaff
Richard Gyan Aboagye, Bernard Yeboah‐Asiamah Asare, Collins Adu, Abdul Cadri, Abdul‐Aziz Seidu, Bright Opoku Ahinkorah, Sanni Yaya

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Women s Health · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIntimate Partner and Family Violence
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaGlobal Affairs CanadaMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDomestic violenceDemographyOdds ratioPoison controlSexual violenceIntimate partnerInjury preventionConfidence intervalSuicide preventionOccupational safety and healthNew guineaMedicinePsychologyEnvironmental healthSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Previous studies have demonstrated that exposure to interparental violence is associated with intimate partner violence justification in a variety of contexts. In this study, we examined the association between exposure to interparental violence and justification of intimate partner violence among women in Papua New Guinea. METHODS: We used data from the 2016-18 Papua New Guinea Demographic and Health Survey. We included 2839 women of reproductive age (15-49 years) in a sexual union (married and cohabiting) in the study. We used a multivariable binary multilevel regression analysis to examine the association between interparental violence and justification of intimate partner violence. We presented the results of the regression analysis using crude odds ratio (cOR) and adjusted odds ratios (aORs), with their 95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: Women exposed to interparental violence were 1.26 (95%CI = 1.05, 1.53) times more likely to justify intimate partner violence than those who were not exposed. Women who resided in the Highlands (aOR = 2.50, 95%CI = 1.78, 3.51), Momase (aOR = 1.96, 95%CI = 1.40, 2.75), and Islands (aOR = 1.42, 95%CI = 1.01, 1.99) were more likely to justify intimate partner violence compared to those in the Southern region. Women who were exposed to one (aOR = 1.38, 95%CI = 1.06, 1.82) mass media were more likely to justify intimate partner violence compared to those who had no exposure to mass media. On the other hand, women aged 25-34 years (aOR = 0.66, 95%CI = 0.48, 0.91) and 35-49 years (aOR = 0.66, 95%CI = 0.44, 0.97) were less likely to justify intimate partner violence compared to those aged 15-24 years. CONCLUSIONS: Our study has shown that exposure to interparental violence is a predictor of intimate partner violence justification. This study suggests the need for conscious and continuous efforts to identify and assist women who have been exposed to interparental violence to help prevent its transition to later life. Policies and interventions should be developed and implemented to curtail children's exposure to domestic violence in their households. Also, laws and policies need to condemn any violence and demystify community justification and acceptance of intimate partner violence, taking into consideration the significant sociodemographic characteristics of the women highlighted in the study.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.035
Threshold uncertainty score0.070

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.357
Teacher spread0.319 · 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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC Women s HealthSame topicIntimate Partner and Family ViolenceFrench-language works237,207