MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388466163 · doi:10.1177/22799036231208326

Associations between small-area sociodemographic characteristics and intimate partner violence in Montréal, Québec

2023· article· en· W4388466163 on OpenAlexaffabout
Paul Rodrigues, Mylène Fernet, Marie‐Marthe Cousineau, Mathieu Philibert

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of public health research · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIntimate Partner and Family Violence
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNeighbourhood (mathematics)Socioeconomic statusDomestic violencePsychological interventionDemographyGeographyPsychologyEnvironmental healthSuicide preventionPoison controlMedicineGerontologySociologyPopulationPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Intimate partner violence (IPV) affects many individuals and can have a significant impact on their health and well-being. In order to inform prevention strategies, several studies have focused on the determinants of IPV. However, knowledge on the association between neighbourhood characteristics and IPV remains scarce. The social disorganization theory posits that certain neighbourhood characteristics are associated with violent behaviours. This theory has been used to explain spatial variations in IPV, but most studies have been conducted in the United States. Little is known about the effect of neighbourhood factors in urban contexts outside of the United States. Design and methods: Using police data from 2016 and 2017, this study estimated the association between sociodemographic characteristics of neighbourhoods (socioeconomic status, single-parenthood, residential instability and ethnocultural heterogeneity) and IPV victimization in Montréal, Québec. Results: Results suggest a neighbourhood-level variation in IPV, and that neighbourhood-level characteristics are associated with IPV victimization. Specifically, the likelihood of IPV is higher in neighbourhoods with the lowest SES level (OR = 2.80, 95%CI: 2.47–3.17, p < 0.001) and the lowest level of residential instability (OR = 0.81, 95%CI: 0.70–0.93, p = 0.003) as well as the highest proportion of single-parent households (OR = 1.88, 95%CI: 1.65–2.15, p < 0.001). Conclusion: Although neighbourhood-level interventions to reduce IPV are rare, our results highlight the importance of developing such preventive strategies. Prevention programs targeting high-risk neighbourhoods may prove effective in reducing IPV.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.035
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.071
Threshold uncertainty score0.993

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0350.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.348
GPT teacher head0.476
Teacher spread0.128 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations6
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of public health researchSame topicIntimate Partner and Family ViolenceFrench-language works237,207