MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409212313 · doi:10.5055/jem.0881

Government response to the increase in gender-based violence during the pandemic in Canada: Lessons for addressing inequity in emergency management practice

2024· article· en· W4409212313 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Emergency Management · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIntimate Partner and Family Violence
Canadian institutionsRoyal Roads University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGovernment (linguistics)PandemicLegislaturePublic healthTransgenderPolitical scienceEconomic growthPublic relationsPublic administrationBusinessCriminologyMedicineSociologyCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)DiseaseNursingLawInfectious disease (medical specialty)Economics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A harmful untended consequence of the protective public health orders issued during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic was an increase in gender-based violence (GBV). This study examined the response of federal, provincial, and territorial governments in Canada to GBV during the peak of the pandemic (between February 2020 and October 2021) through a review of relevant media releases. These documents were then assessed for evidence of effective crisis leadership and compared to established international guidance for addressing GBV in disasters and other humanitarian emergencies. Five major themes emerged from the media review with respect to government communications and actions. First, governments announced funding to organizations working in the domestic violence sector to help support their ability to adapt their services during the pandemic. Second, media releases described efforts undertaken by governments to expand several different types of support services for victims of GBV. Third, governments promoted awareness of the ongoing problem of GBV, as well as its increase during the pandemic. Fourth, government communications acknowledged heightened risk for some populations, including Indigenous women, lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, and intersex populations, and those at risk of human trafficking. Fifth, legislative and policy changes were announced by some governments during the pandemic. An analysis of the timing of communications suggests that only the federal government and one third of provinces and territories took early action to address the increase in GBV during the pandemic, which is consistent with international guidance that calls for the use of the precautionary principle. Most of the governments responded to the GBV crisis late or not at all. Although the analysis of media releases alone is insufficient to establish the scope of government actions taken to address GBV during the pandemic, public communication related to ongoing threats is an expected crisis communication competency. This study offers recommendations for practice, which might help address gender inequity in disasters.

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.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.577
Threshold uncertainty score0.865

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.072
GPT teacher head0.388
Teacher spread0.316 · 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