TBI and Intimate Partner Violence in Women Presenting to Orthopedic Fracture Clinic
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Victims of intimate partner violence (IPV) are at substantial risk for traumatic brain injury (TBI), as the head, neck and face are the areas most often targeted during episodes of abuse. Victims of IPV may present to health care practitioners, including orthopedic surgeons, with IPV-related injuries, but they are not routinely screened for TBI. There is increased awareness of IPV among orthopedic surgeons in Canada, and training is now available about how to address IPV in the fracture clinic. Prevalence of TBI in this group, however, is unknown. TBI-related cognitive disorders may increase risk for poor outcomes from IPV, thus knowledge about TBI prevalence in this group is critical for clinical intervention. This study aimed to determine prevalence of IPV and TBI among women presenting to orthopedic fracture clinic. We interviewed 105 women presenting at an orthopedic fracture clinic. All participants completed the Ohio State University TBI identification method-interview (OSU-TBI), the direct method of IPV screening questionnaire, a modified version of the HELPS questionnaire, and the neurobehavioral symptom inventory (NSI). Study variables were 12-month and lifetime prevalence of IPV, prevalence of mild and moderate-severe TBI, and prevalence of comorbid IPV and TBI. Forty-six of 105 women (43.8%) who completed the OSU-TBI reported at least one head or neck injury resulting in a TBI. Of women reporting TBI, 11 (23.9%) met criteria for moderate-severe TBI. Forty-four of 104 women who completed the IPV screening questionnaire women (42.3%) disclosed a history of IPV-related abuse within their lifetime, with 25 (24%) of these women reporting physical abuse. Twenty of these women (19.2%) reported a history of IPV-related abuse within the past twelve months, with 7 (6.7%) women reporting physical abuse. Of 104 women who completed both the OSU-TBI and the IPV screening, 23 (22.1%) had comorbid TBI (mild, moderate or severe) and lifetime history of IPV. These preliminary results suggest that a large proportion of women attending an orthopedic fracture clinic have experienced IPV (42.3%), TBI (43.8%), or comorbid IPV and TBI (22.1%). These findings point to a need for development of regular IPV and TBI screening tools among women presenting to health clinics for physical injuries, as well as the need for further investigation of the consequences of TBI among IPV victims.
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 | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.032 | 0.017 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.020 |
| Open science | 0.012 | 0.026 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.030 | 0.021 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".