MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409510073 · doi:10.1080/01488376.2025.2489549

Military Cultural Competency in Canadian Sexual Assault Support Centers: “Not Here for Lessons”

2025· article· en· W4409510073 on OpenAlexaffabout
Ashley Ibbotson, Bibora Imre-Millei, Nicholas Held, Reshna M. Ninan, Margaret C. McKinnon, Linna Tam‐Seto

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Social Service Research · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicInterpreting and Communication in Healthcare
Canadian institutionsSt. Joseph’s Healthcare HamiltonHomewood Research InstituteQueen's UniversityMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSexual assaultPsychologyCriminologySuicide preventionPoison controlMedical educationMedicineClinical psychologyApplied psychologyMedical emergency

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Military cultural competency involves understanding the unique needs of military and veteran (MV) populations. Research shows that culturally competent care improves health outcomes, yet little is known about civilian sexual assault centers (SACs) supporting MV clients. Many MV clients affected by military sexual trauma (MST) seek community services due to mistrust of the military system. This study examined the military cultural competency of Canadian SACs to improve support for MV clients. Virtual qualitative interviews were conducted with SAC staff across Canada who support MV clients affected by MST. Data were analyzed using Framework Analysis, guided by the Military and Veteran Family Cultural Competency Framework and related literature. Inductive interpretive phenomenological analysis was also applied. Five interviews with SAC staff revealed varying levels of military cultural competency, especially in cultural knowledge and skills. Participants expressed strong interest in adopting promising practices to enhance care. The study identifies strengths and gaps in SACs’ support for MST survivors, offering recommendations for resource development, staff training, and competency frameworks. Further research and policy review are needed to address these gaps and enhance culturally competent care.

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 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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.385
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.003
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 head0.238
GPT teacher head0.584
Teacher spread0.346 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Social Service ResearchSame topicInterpreting and Communication in HealthcareFrench-language works237,207