Violence in the Elderly: Results from the Abuel Study [elektroninis išteklius]
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of ABUEL study was - to investigate the prevalence of violence against elderly persons in selected European countries. Methods The data was collected cross-sectionally (ABUEL, Elder abuse: A multinational prevalence survey”) in 2009. The respondents were 4467 randomly selected persons aged 60-84 living in seven European cities: Ancona (Italy), Athens (Greece), Granada (Spain), Kaunas (Lithuania), Ludwigsburg (Germany), Porto (Portugal) and Stockholm (Sweden). Various types of violence (e.g. physical, psychological) were assessed. Results The preliminary findings showed that almost one quarter (22.6%, CI (95%) 21.4-23.8%) of the respondents experienced any type of violence during the past year. Physical violence was reported by 2.6% of the respondents and it corresponded to 9.4% of all reported cases of violence. This type of violence differed by country, with the highest rates in Sweden (4.2%) and Greece (3.4%) and the lowest in Italy (1.0%) and Spain (1.3%). Discussion and Conclusions The preliminary results indicate that violence is a severe problem in the ageing Europe. To address this public health challenge collective actions should be facilitated. Only multi-sector collaboration and common efforts may reduce the prevalence of abuse and create a safer environment. Acknowledgements Abuel was supported by the EAHC (EU) and conducted with the help of the Abuel groups in each participating country.
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 | 0.005 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".