ArticleBMC family practice2007
The sensitivity and specificity of four questions (HARK) to identify intimate partner violence: a diagnostic accuracy study in general practice.
Article in BMC family practice, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 89 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
89 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Intimate partner violence during COVID-19: systematic review and meta-analysis according to methodological choices.BMC public health · 2024Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Development of a brief measure of intimate partner violence experiences: the Composite Abuse Scale (Revised)-Short Form (CASR-SF).BMJ open · 2016Pooled it
- Intimate partner violence screening tools: a systematic review.American journal of preventive medicine · 2009Pooled it
- PrEP and Contraceptive Persistence Among Young Women Receiving Sexual and Reproductive Health Services Through Hair Salons in South Africa.Journal of acquired immune deficiency syndromes (1999) · 2026Trial
- A pilot cluster randomized controlled trial assessing uptake of PrEP and contraception in hair salons in South Africa.BMC public health · 2025Trial
- Recent Intimate Partner Violence and Oral Contraceptive Pill Adherence in a Cohort of Reproductive-Aged Women.Journal of women's health (2002) · 2022Trial
- Interpersonal therapy versus antidepressant medication for treatment of postpartum depression and anxiety among women with HIV in Zambia: a randomized feasibility trial.Journal of the International AIDS Society · 2022Trial
- The Sexunzipped trial: optimizing the design of online randomized controlled trials.Journal of medical Internet research · 2013Trial
- Women's evaluation of abuse and violence care in general practice: a cluster randomised controlled trial (weave).BMC public health · 2010Trial
- Patterns of social determinants of health screening and health-related social needs among patients with newly diagnosed breast cancer in a safety-net system.Breast cancer research and treatment · 2026Article
- Impact of Chronic Stress and Trauma on Asthma Pathophysiology and Outcomes.Current allergy and asthma reports · 2026Review
- Beyond the Composite Abuse Scale: What Women Emphasize about Their Intimate Partner's Violence.Journal of interpersonal violence · 2026Article
- Alcohol and Cannabis Use in the Context of Violence Experiences and Traditional Masculinity Attitudes Among Black Emerging Adult Men in Baltimore, Maryland.Journal of interpersonal violence · 2026Article
- Pregnancy, Birth, Neonatal, and Mental Health Outcomes Are Minimally Associated with Pregnancy Ambivalence.Studies in family planning · 2026Article
- Drivers of the association between armed conflict and intimate partner violence: A systematic review.Global mental health (Cambridge, England) · 2026Review
- Article
- Gender-based discrimination towards cisgender women in low- and middle-income countries: a scoping review of definitions and measures used in the health literature.BMJ public health · 2026Article
- Site-randomised trial of a multilevel digital intervention to reduce maternal morbidity and mortality: a study protocol.BMJ open · 2025Article
- Common data elements for maternal health research: Expert consensus emerging from a modified Delphi study.Pregnancy (Hoboken, N.J.) · 2025Article
29 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIntimate partner violence (IPV) including physical, sexual and emotional violence, causes short and long term ill-health. Brief questions that reliably identify women experiencing IPV who present in clinical settings are a pre-requisite for an appropriate response from health services to this substantial public health problem. We estimated the sensitivity and specificity of four questions (HARK) developed from the Abuse Assessment screen, compared to a 30-item abuse questionnaire, the Composite Abuse Scale (CAS).
methodsWe administered the four HARK questions and the CAS to women approached by two researchers in general practice waiting rooms in Newham, east London. Inclusions: women aged more than 17 years waiting to see a doctor or nurse, who had been in an intimate relationship in the last year. EXCLUSIONS: women who were accompanied by children over four years of age or another adult, too unwell to complete the questionnaires, unable to understand English or unable to give informed consent.
resultsTwo hundred and thirty two women were recruited. The response rate was 54%. The prevalence of current intimate partner violence, within the last 12 months, using the CAS cut off score of >or=3, was 23% (95% C.I. 17% to 28%) with pre-test odds of 0.3 (95% C.I. 0.2 to 0.4). The receiver operator characteristic curve demonstrated that a HARK cut off score of >or=1 maximises the true positives whilst minimising the false positives. The sensitivity of the optimal HARK cut-off score of >or=1 was 81% (95% C.I. 69% to 90%), specificity 95% (95% C.I. 91% to 98%), positive predictive value 83% (95% C.I. 70% to 91%), negative predictive value 94% (95% C.I. 90% to 97%), likelihood ratio 16 (95% C.I. 8 to 31) and post-test odds 5.
conclusionThe four HARK questions accurately identify women experiencing IPV in the past year and may help women disclose abuse in general practice. The HARK questions could be incorporated into the electronic medical record in primary care to prompt clinicians to ask about recent partner violence and to encourage disclosure by patients. Future research should test the effectiveness of HARK in clinical consultations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.