MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401975885 · doi:10.17645/si.8422

Exploring the Lives of Children Born of Conflict‐Related Sexual Violence Through Art

2024· article· en· W4401975885 on OpenAlexafffund
Myriam Denov

Bibliographic record

VenueSocial Inclusion · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicArt Therapy and Mental Health
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersKillam TrustsCanada Council for the ArtsPierre Elliott Trudeau Foundation
KeywordsSexual violenceSociologyGender studiesCriminologyPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although the realities of children born of conflict‐related sexual violence have gained increased attention, limited research has explored the issue from the perspectives of the children themselves. Drawing upon a sample of 79 children born of sexual violence in Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA) captivity, and using arts‐based methods, this study explored the wartime and post‐conflict experiences directly from children born of conflict‐related sexual violence in northern Uganda. The study illustrates how the arts‐based methods of mask‐making, drawing, and life maps—developed in consultation with local researchers and youth born in LRA captivity—helped to capture the complex wartime and post‐war realities of this unique population of children and youth, as well as enabled young people to choose what to share and what to withhold during the research process. More easily distributed, accessed, and consumed than traditional academic publications, the medium of art can have a widespread, immediate, and powerful impact. The article concludes with the strengths, limitations, and ethical implications of arts‐based methods, as well as the importance of considering culture and context for future research.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0100.011
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0010.008
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.094
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.217 · 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 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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSocial InclusionSame topicArt Therapy and Mental HealthFrench-language works237,207