MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408036202 · doi:10.1177/15248380251320994

Research on Law and Policy to Prevent Teen Dating Violence: Scoping Review

2025· review· en· W4408036202 on OpenAlexafffund
Deinera Exner‐Cortens, Wendy Craig

Bibliographic record

VenueTrauma Violence & Abuse · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIntimate Partner and Family Violence
Canadian institutionsQueen's UniversityUniversity of Calgary
FundersAlberta Children's Hospital Research Institute
KeywordsContext (archaeology)Poison controlSuicide preventionHuman factors and ergonomicsInclusion (mineral)Injury preventionIntervention (counseling)Public policyPublic healthPublic health lawPolitical sciencePsychologyHealth policyMedicineLawEnvironmental healthSocial psychologyNursingGeographyPublic health policy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Teen dating violence (TDV) is a global public health issue with numerous consequences for physical, psychological, social, and emotional well-being. Thus, prevention of TDV has been a focus of research attention for the past several decades. As part of a comprehensive TDV prevention approach, programs, practices, and policies are needed. Yet, no prior research has reviewed the state of the science on laws and policies designed to prevent or address TDV. Thus, the objective of this scoping review was to identify existing global, empirical research on law and policy for TDV prevention and intervention at the municipal, provincial/state/territorial, or federal/national levels. Through comprehensive searches in eight databases in February 2022 and January 2024, we located 4,826 articles for potential inclusion. From this pool, articles were included if they focused on adolescents and on TDV-relevant law or policy at the local/municipal/school, state/provincial/territorial, or federal/national level(s), and were published in a peer-reviewed journal in English between January 1983 and December 2023. Following title/abstract screening and full-text review, 19 studies were ultimately included. These 19 studies focused on TDV law and policy content (36.8%, n = 7), implementation (36.8%, n = 7), and outcomes (26.3%, n = 5). All studies but one were conducted in high-income countries. Findings from this body of work may be useful as other jurisdictions develop TDV prevention and intervention laws and policies. Future work is also needed to understand the developmental, contextual, and policy context for TDV prevention outside of high-income, Western countries.

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)0.025
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.137
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.131

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0250.137
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.005
Bibliometrics0.0230.023
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0070.006
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0050.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.150
GPT teacher head0.526
Teacher spread0.375 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTrauma Violence & AbuseSame topicIntimate Partner and Family ViolenceFrench-language works237,207