Inequalities in intimate partner violence screening and receiving information among diverse groups of women: an online survey during COVID-19 lockdowns
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Research shows violence against women likely increases during emergencies. COVID-19's emergence exacerbated intimate partner violence (IPV), suggesting that healthcare services (HCS) should have increased IPV screening efforts and referrals of victims to support services. However, little is known about the prevalence of IPV screening and information provision during COVID-19 lockdowns. METHODS: We examined prevalence of 'ever been screened' (ES) for IPV and 'receiving information about support services' (RI) in HCS during COVID-19 lockdowns and compared these among non-immigrant Jewish women, immigrant Jewish and other women, and Palestinian women citizens in Israel. We collected data during Israel's second and third COVID-19 lockdowns (October 2020-February 2021) using a structured, online, self-administrated Arabic-language and Hebrew-language questionnaire. Eligibility criteria included women ≥18 years old, citizens of Israel, in a current intimate relationship (permanent or occasional) who used social media or smartphones. In total, 519 women completed the survey: 73 Palestinian, 127 Jewish immigrants and others, and 319 non-immigrant Jewish. RESULTS: Overall, 37.2% of women reported any IPV, of whom just 26.9% reported ES, 39.4% reported RI and 13.5% reported both (ES&RI). Palestinian women reported higher IPV rates (49.3%) compared with non-immigrant Jewish (34.2%) and immigrant Jewish and other (37.8%) women; however, they reported lower ES (OR 0.64, 90% CI (0.34 to 1.86) and RI 0.29 (0.17 to 0.50). CONCLUSIONS: In a survey during COVID-19 lockdowns, only about one-quarter of women who reported IPV were ES for IPV, or RI about support services, suggesting strengthened IPV screening is needed in HCS during emergencies, particularly targeting minority women, who report higher IPV but receive fewer services.
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 | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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".