MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7024029274

The Prevalence and Consequences of Gender-based Violence Among Trans and Non-Binary University Students in Ontario

2024· article· en· W7024029274 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueScholars Commons (Wilfrid Laurier University) · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicLGBTQ Health, Identity, and Policy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExploratory researchInterpersonal relationshipInterpersonal communicationInterpersonal violenceSuicide preventionPoison controlHuman factors and ergonomicsOccupational safety and health
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Community studies documenting gender-based violence (GBV) experienced by trans and non-binary (TNB) people often find differences in prevalence across TNB subgroups. Studies of TNB university students tend to treat them as a homogenous group, thus gender differences in terms of subgroups are unknown. Using data collected from TNB Ontario university students, I examined the prevalence and impacts of GBV across three TNB subgroups (trans man spectrum, trans women spectrum, and gender queer/non-binary). Specifically, reflecting subtle and overt forms of GBV, among each subgroup I explored the frequency of trans environmental microaggressions, trans interpersonal microaggressions, and victimization, and their relationship with positive mental health, psychological distress, perceived stress, and campus belonging. Trans man spectrum students reported experiencing both microaggression types significantly more frequently than the trans woman spectrum. No other differences in prevalence were found. Consistent with minority stress theory, at all levels of analysis statistically significant relationships between GBV forms and wellbeing outcomes, with one exception, were in expected direction, suggesting that experiences of GBV are associated with poorer wellbeing outcomes. Exploratory and explanatory analyses suggest that GBV can negatively impact students’ wellbeing, but these impacts are not identical across TNB subgroups. This study highlights the importance of considering TNB students as a heterogeneous group when examining GBV and its consequences. Implications for policy, practice, and the training of social work students are offered.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.149
Threshold uncertainty score0.300

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.024
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.257 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScholars Commons (Wilfrid Laurier University)→Same topicLGBTQ Health, Identity, and Policy→French-language works237,207→