MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389785955 · doi:10.2196/52067

The Impact of Forced Separations Between Women and Their Pets in Domestic Violence Situations and the Effectiveness of Crisis Response: Protocol for a Conceptual Framework

2023· article· en· W4389785955 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jasmine Montgomery, Janice Lloyd, Zhanming Liang

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Research Protocols · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicHuman-Animal Interaction Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProtocol (science)Domestic violencePsychologyConceptual frameworkSocial psychologyMedicinePoison controlHuman factors and ergonomicsEnvironmental healthSociologySocial scienceAlternative medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Women are at high risk of experiencing trauma, guilt, and stress when forced to separate from their companion animals when fleeing domestic violence. Where little support is available for women and pets to stay together, women may be forced to delay leaving the abusive relationship or leave the pet with the abuser. Forced separation places both women and pets at substantial risk, where pets may be used as a coercive control measure. However, little evidence exists regarding the extent to which Australian services or policies offer support in these circumstances. OBJECTIVE: This research aims to increase the understanding and the impacts of forced separation between women and their pets in domestic violence situations. The research will investigate the effectiveness of service responses for both women and animals, aiming to develop a policy framework that guides service improvement with the goal of enhancing outcomes for women and pets fleeing domestic violence. METHODS: This protocol paper describes the process of developing a conceptual framework of 4 studies that include a scoping review, policy analysis, focus groups, and interviews that guide the design of the qualitative research project. RESULTS: A scoping review of the literature on forced separation from pets in domestic violence, natural disasters, and homelessness situations has led to the development of a conceptual framework that guided the design of the proposed study. The review also confirmed the necessity of the proposed research project in addressing the lack of Australian national frameworks and guidance available for women and pets seeking formal support in domestic violence situations. As of August 2023, supporting organizations have commenced the distribution of the research flyers. Expected data collection will be completed between August and October 2023. The results are expected to be published in June 2025. CONCLUSIONS: Via a systematic process, the importance of the proposed study in improving the understanding of the impact of forced separation between women and their pets at times of domestic violence and the gaps in best supporting both women and their pets has been confirmed. A study design based on the learnings from previous studies and the focus of the current research has been finalized. The impact of the research project in developing an Australian national framework for best supporting women and their pets in crisis situations is anticipated. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): PRR1-10.2196/52067.

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)0.097
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.110
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.097
Threshold uncertainty score0.512

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0970.110
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0040.004
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.011
Bibliometrics0.0070.007
Science and technology studies0.0100.007
Scholarly communication0.0080.008
Open science0.0080.009
Research integrity0.0100.013
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0610.007

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 head0.138
GPT teacher head0.600
Teacher spread0.463 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Research ProtocolsSame topicHuman-Animal Interaction StudiesFrench-language works237,207