Beyond the Composite Abuse Scale: What Women Emphasize about Their Intimate Partner’s Violence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Healing Journey longitudinal study of 665 Canadian women abused by intimate partners used the 30-item Composite Abuse Scale (CAS) to assess the severity of the intimate partner violence (IPV). Of the total, 461 women added additional details that were qualitatively analyzed to provide context to the IPV, including death threats, life-threatening physical violence, including strangulation, and serious coercive control, issues not assessed by the CAS. Further, many partners were abusive beyond the couple relationship, threatening family members, children, and pets, and also not in the CAS. We then retrospectively reviewed other IPV measures to consider whether these might have more comprehensively fit with the women's experiences. Of these, four IPV measures more fully captured the women's descriptions of their IPV than the CAS (three available before and one after the study was conceptualized). This retrospective analysis provides suggestions for using standardized measures to assess IPV more comprehensively.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".