MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Physiological Alterations within the Cerebrovasculature in Survivors of Intimate Partner Violence

2017· other· en· W6908785355 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueBiblioBoard Library Catalog (Open Research Library) · 2017
Typeother
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDomestic violencePopulationPoison controlNeurocognitiveInjury preventionOccupational safety and healthSuicide preventionTraumatic brain injuryHuman factors and ergonomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Problem: Intimate partner violence (IPV) is an under-reported but extremely prevalent problem in North America. It is estimated 51.9 million (29%) women and 18 million (10%) men living in Canada (or USA) will experience rape, stalking, or physical violence from an intimate partner at some point in the lives. Recently it has been reported there are >10 million people in North America each year who are victims of domestic abuse, with 25% of survivors report being hit in the head more than 20 times in the past 5 years. The prevalence of traumatic brain injuries (TBI) within this population is thought to range between 30% and 74%, as the face, head and neck are among the most commonly reported targets of the physical assault by IPV survivors. Given these injury mechanisms, it is understandable some of the mental health challenges faced by victims of IPV may be rooted in alterations in brain physiology/function.Objectives: The overall objective of this investigation is to understand the physiological changes underlying the symptoms and deficits in neurocognitive function observed in the women who have experienced IPV. Primary Hypothesis: TBI as a result of IPV will lead to quantifiable impairments in cerebral blood flow regulation (i.e. cerebral autoregulation and neurovascular coupling metrics). Secondary Hypothesis: The degree of impairment in cerebrovascular and cardiovascular functions will correlate with higher degrees of brain injury severity in survivors of IPV.Methods: Eighteen female IPV survivors (35.4 u00b1 8.7 years; BMI 25.5 u00b1 7.4 kg/cm2) with 13.4 u00b1 1.7 years of education participated in this investigation. The survivors were tested on 2 separate days. The first day consisted of the psychopathological self-reported and semi-structured interviews performed by a trained clinician. The second day consisted of the SCAT5 and a series of laboratory based examinations including an assessment of cerebral autoregulation and neurovascular coupling tasks.Results: IPV survivors with greater brain injury severity assessment scores (indicative of more frequent, recent and severe TBIs) displayed greater alterations in certain cerebrovascular markers (increase buffering in cerebral autoregulation, reductions in cerebral blood velocity) with minimal changes to others (area under the curve for neurovascular coupling). Conclusions: These findings of reductions in cerebral blood velocity and increased buffering in cerebral autoregulation are indicative of stiffening of the cerebrovasculature in this population. Of additional concern is these impairments appear to be related to the severity of self-reported brain injury and may contribute to the augmented symptoms reported in this population. Taken together, the current study provides objective evidence of TBI-related cerebrovascular impairments in women who have experienced IPV and suggests this should be taken into account in providing support services to this population as they negotiate the myriad changes required to break the abuse cycle.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Bibliometrics, Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Open science, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesOpen science, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.044
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0130.014
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0040.011
Open science0.0160.012
Research integrity0.0010.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.004

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 head0.092
GPT teacher head0.367
Teacher spread0.275 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiblioBoard Library Catalog (Open Research Library)French-language works237,207