MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390667000 · doi:10.1111/jocn.16976

Understanding what shapes the priorities of women who are mothering in the context of intimate partner violence: A qualitative study

2024· article· en· W4390667000 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Sharon Broughton, Marilyn Ford‐Gilboe, Colleen Varcoe

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Nursing · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIntimate Partner and Family Violence
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaWestern University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchWestern University
KeywordsDomestic violenceContext (archaeology)IntersectionalityThematic analysisQualitative researchHealth careNursingPsychologyPoison controlSociologySuicide preventionMedicineGender studiesPolitical scienceEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIM: To explore the priorities of women mothering children in the context of intimate partner violence and to understand what shapes those priorities. DESIGN: A qualitative study using interpretive description, informed by Feminist Intersectionality adhering to the COREQ guidelines. METHODS: Thematic analysis was used to analyse the data. DATA SOURCES: Dialogic, semi-structured interviews were conducted with a community sample of 20 adult Canadian women who were mothering dependent children (under 18 years) in the context of recent intimate partner violence from a current or former partner. RESULTS: Women's main priorities focused on their own and their children's well-being and creating stability related to housing and finances. Three themes identified: it's all about the kids; my safety…totally disregarded; and I have to take care of him. Multiple external factors (coercive control, structural inequities, assumptions about mothering) shape priorities and the tensions arising from competing priorities women felt compelled to address simultaneously. CONCLUSION: Priorities of women mothering in the context of intimate partner violence are complex, shaped not only by what they want but by the limited options available to them given constraints such as income, employment, housing and service responses. Coercive control, structural inequities and assumptions about mothering are important factors influencing mothers' priorities and experiences. Better understanding mothers' priorities can support better tailored policies, services and nursing practice. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING: Structural inequities that negatively impact health and well-being by limiting access to resources and the supports needed to enhance health can be better recognized and addressed through a trauma and violence informed care approach. IMPACT: This study addressed understanding the priorities of women mothering in the context of intimate partner violence. This research will impact women mothering in the context of intimate partner violence who receive care from nurses and other providers as well as those who provide care. REPORTING METHOD: This study adhered to relevant EQUATOR guidelines (the COREQ checklist). NO PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: The women who took part in the interviews for this study did not participate in the study design, analysis or manuscript preparation.

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)0.016
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.551

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0160.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.205
GPT teacher head0.508
Teacher spread0.303 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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

Citations5
Published2024
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical NursingSame topicIntimate Partner and Family ViolenceFrench-language works237,207