Exploring access to health and social supports for intimate partner violence (IPV) survivors during stressful life events (SLEs)—A scoping review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Survivors of intimate partner violence (IPV) often face increased incidents of violence during stressful life events (SLEs) such as economic recessions, environmental disasters, and pandemics. These events can diminish the effectiveness of both formal (e.g., health, social, justice, labor, community) and informal (e.g., friends, family, neighbors) support systems. Additionally, SLEs exacerbate existing health and social inequities, making it necessary to understand the accessibility of support services during these times. This scoping review investigates access to services by individuals experiencing IPV during SLEs in high-income countries. APPROACH: A comprehensive search was conducted across several electronic databases including MEDLINE (OVID), Embase (OVID), PsychInfo (OVID), CINAHL (EBSCO), Global Health (EBSCO), Gender Watch (ProQuest), Web of Science, and Applied Social Sciences Index & Abstracts (ProQuest), along with the search engine Google Scholar. This search, which imposed no date restrictions, was extended through May 22nd, 2024. Key search terms were developed from prior literature and in consultation with an expert librarian, focusing on 'stressful life events,' 'intimate partner violence,' and 'access to services.'. Each study was screened and extracted by two reviewers and conflicts were resolved through discussion or a third reviewer. RESULTS: The search across eight databases and citation searching resulted in a total of 7396 potentially relevant articles. After removing 1968 duplicates and screening 5428 based on titles and abstracts, 200 articles underwent full abstract review. Ultimately, 74 articles satisfied the inclusion criteria and were selected for further analysis. The analysis focused on barriers and facilitators to access, identifying challenges within Survivors' support systems, redirected resources during crises, and complex control dynamics and marginalization. Over 90% of the literature included covered the recent COVID-19 pandemic. Addressing these challenges requires innovative strategies, sustained funding, and targeted interventions for high-risk subgroups. CONCLUSION: This scoping review systematically outlined the challenges and enabling factors influencing the availability of support services for Survivors of IPV during SLEs. It underscores the need for robust, culturally sensitive health and social support mechanisms, and policies. Such measures are essential to better protect and assist IPV Survivors and their service providers during these critical times. Furthermore, it is imperative to integrate the insights and expertise of the violence against women (VAW) sector into emergency planning and policy-making to ensure comprehensive and effective responses that address the unique needs of Survivors in crises.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.013 | 0.066 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.025 | 0.024 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".