Gender-Based Violence Among People With Disabilities: Qualitative Insights on Sexual and Reproductive Health Impacts Across the Life Course
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Women and gender-diverse people with disabilities are at an elevated risk of gender-based violence (GBV). This study examines how women and gender-diverse people with disabilities experience GBV and how such experiences impact their sexual and reproductive health (SRH) across the life course. We conducted a community-engaged qualitative study from 2022 to 2023 with women and gender-diverse people with disabilities aged 18 years and older living in Canada. Using an inductive thematic approach, we analyzed 26 semi-structured interviews about experiences of GBV and SRH across the life course, including childhood, the reproductive years, and older adulthood. Disability and GBV intersected over time: GBV experienced earlier in life caused mental health disabilities that impacted subsequent life course stages. Ableism meant participants were targets of violence and made disclosure more difficult. GBV experiences impacted SRH by (a) causing new SRH concerns (e.g., unintended pregnancies and forced abortions); (b) amplifying existing SRH concerns (e.g., endometriosis); (c) influencing reproductive decision-making (e.g., contraception and sterilization); (d) shaping sexual practices and relationships (e.g., engagement in high-risk sexual behaviors and intimacy); and (e) changing interactions with SRH services (e.g., painful pelvic exams). Characteristics of services (e.g., availability of disability-related accommodations) also affected disclosure and trust. These findings highlight the long-lasting impacts of GBV on SRH among women and gender-diverse people with disabilities. There is a need for provider education on disability and GBV, and trauma-informed and disability-affirming SRH services developed and implemented in collaboration with people with lived experiences of disability and GBV.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".