Interventions for intimate partner violence during the perinatal period: a scoping review protocol
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Globally, the prevalence and incidence of perinatal intimate partner violence (IPV) are well documented and substantiated; however, there is an urgent need to identify interventions to prevent recurrence or revictimisation, and decrease the harms of perinatal IPV. This scoping review is designed to broadly capture all potential interventions for the secondary prevention of IPV, review them in detail, and assess what can reduce revictimisation and foster improvements in both maternal and neonatal outcomes. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: With the structure of the Joanna Briggs Institute and Arksey and O'Malley methodology for scoping reviews, the search will be conducted in: MEDLINE(R) ALL (OvidSP), Embase (OvidSP), CINAHL (EBSCOHost), APA PsycInfo (OvidSP), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (OvidSP), Web of Science, and Applied Social Sciences Index & Abstracts (ProQuest). A manual search of the reference lists of the retrieved articles will be conducted to capture all relevant studies for potential inclusion. A year limit of January 2000-June 2022 will be applied to retrieve most current peer-reviewed articles. No search filters or language limits will be used, but only publications in English and French will be eligible for inclusion. Interventions include but are not limited to: psychotherapy, educational sessions, home visitation, etc. Outcomes include but are not limited to: (1) harms of IPV among survivors (eg, revictimisation) and (2) adverse perinatal outcomes (eg, preterm birth). Interventions will be excluded if they target the perpetrator or child(ren) alone. Titles and abstracts of included studies will be screened in duplicate. Full-text documents will be extracted and reviewed by two independent reviewers. Conflicts between reviewers will be resolved by a third independent reviewer. Findings will be presented with descriptive statistics and narrative synthesis. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval is not required for this scoping review. The results will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publication and conference presentations. STUDY REGISTRATION: Open Science Framework (OSF) registry (https://osf.io/e294r) in Centre for Open Science (OSF) on 27 May 2022.
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 | 0.084 | 0.053 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.015 | 0.013 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.018 | 0.016 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.011 |
| Open science | 0.007 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.009 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.095 | 0.022 |
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".