MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6942135883 · doi:10.14288/1.0448207

Combined programming to support women-identified survivors of domestic violence experiencing co-occurring problematic substance use

2025· article· en· W6942135883 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenuecIRcle (University of British Columbia) · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicMycorrhizal Fungi and Plant Interactions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAgency (philosophy)Domestic violenceService providerSubstance useHarmNeeds assessmentQualitative researchService (business)Poison control

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Women-identified survivors of domestic violence (DV) experiencing co-occurring problematic substance use (SU) have complex service needs which are inadequately addressed by traditional siloed approaches to service delivery. Combined programming, which simultaneously addresses needs related to both DV and SU, demonstrates effectiveness in addressing the needs of this population. However, research is only recently emerging, and agencies have been slow to incorporate combined interventions. Addressing this critical gap, this qualitative study explored the strengths and limitations of community-based agencies in Canada offering combined DV/SU programming. Using an Interpretive Description design, semi-structured interviews with service providers offering combined DV/SU programming were used to explore the specific motivations, theoretical approaches, policies, successes, and barriers to implementing such programming. The study found that successful programming was informed by trauma-informed, client-centered, and harm reduction approaches, and focused on addressing DV/SU needs holistically. The study also uniquely described the unanticipated impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic, including increases in complex client needs and limitations placed on community-based agencies, in motivating practice shifts towards combined interventions. Practice recommendations garnered through participant interviews included efforts to increase staff competencies, address stigma and misconceptions, build agency capacity, and further incorporate trauma-informed, client-centered, and harm reduction approaches. This study provides useful insights for future research, policies, and supports that would address the unique needs of women experiencing DV/SU.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.050

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0040.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.007
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.198
Teacher spread0.187 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuecIRcle (University of British Columbia)→Same topicMycorrhizal Fungi and Plant Interactions→French-language works237,207→