MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408669427 · doi:10.35502/jcswb.402

Culturally competent trauma-informed practices benefit survivors and investigations

2025· article· en· W4408669427 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jason Crawford, C. Markle, Andrew Rooks

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Community Safety and Well-Being · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicResilience and Mental Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyPsychotherapistMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study presents findings from an examination of trauma-informed investigative practices within the Sexual Assault Unit (SAU) of the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Police Department (CMPD). Through a comprehensive analysis of sexual assault cases and key informant interviews, the study explores the impact of cultural competency on investigative processes and the provision of support services to survivors. The findings underscore the critical importance of cultural sensitivity in shaping both the investigation and the delivery of victim-centred care. While the SAU demonstrates a commitment to trauma-informed practices, there remains a need for expanded methodologies to fully understand and develop culturally sensitive approaches. Furthermore, the study highlights the importance of considering culturally relevant intergenerational trauma in addressing the needs of survivors. Moving forward, research to enhance trauma-informed practices must prioritize the integration of cultural competency across all facets of the investigative process to promote healing, empowerment, and justice for survivors of sexual assault.

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.043
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.065

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.043
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0080.014
Scholarly communication0.0070.004
Open science0.0010.018
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.375
Teacher spread0.344 · 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 designNot applicable
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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Community Safety and Well-BeingSame topicResilience and Mental HealthFrench-language works237,207