Health and social consequences for survivors of genocidal rape: A systematic scoping review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The unique forms of trauma experienced by survivors of genocidal rape are not well understood. Hence, we conducted a systematic scoping review regarding the consequences for survivors of rape during genocide. Searches conducted in PubMed, Global Health, Scopus, PyscInfo, and Embase produced a total of 783 articles. After completing the screening process, 34 articles were eligible for inclusion in the review. The included articles focus on survivors from six different genocides, with most focusing on either the genocide of the Tutsis in Rwanda or the Yazidis in Iraq. The study findings consistently show that survivors deal with stigmatization as well as a lack of both financial and psychological social support. This lack of support is partly due to social ostracization and shame but is also attributed to the fact that many survivors' families and other providers of social support were murdered during the violence. Many survivors, particularly young girls, reported dealing with intense forms of trauma both as a direct result of sexual violence and due to witnessing the death of their community members during the period of genocide. A notable proportion of survivors became pregnant from genocidal rape and contracted HIV. Group therapy was shown to improve mental health outcomes across numerous studies. These findings have important implications and can inform recovery process efforts. Psychosocial supports, stigma reduction campaigns, community reestablishment, and financial assistance are integral in facilitating recovery. These findings can also play an important role in shaping refugee support programs.
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 | 0.008 | 0.045 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.013 | 0.013 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".