Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21185737›Full record

Trial reportWomen's health issues : official publication of the Jacobs Institute of Women's Health

Increasing discussions of intimate partner violence in prenatal care using Video Doctor plus Provider Cueing: a randomized, controlled trial.

Janice Humphreys, Janice Y Tsoh, Michael A Kohn, Barbara Gerbert

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Women's health issues : official publication of the Jacobs Institute of Women's Health. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

29 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Screening women for intimate partner violence in healthcare settings.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2015
    Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Janice HumphreysDepartment of Family Health Care Nursing, University of California-San Francisco, 2 Koret Way, San Francisco, CA 94143, USA. Janice.humphreys@nursing.ucsf.edu
Janice Y Tsoh
Michael A Kohn
Barbara Gerbert

Funding

TREATMENTS FOR COMPLEX PATIENTS IN NEW SETTINGSP50DA009253 · NIDA · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI SORENSEN, JAMES L · 1994 to 2014
$28.2M
Prevention for Prenatal HealthR01DA015597 · NIDA · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI GERBERT, BARBARA JOAN · 2003 to 2006
$1.9M
NIDA NIH HHS P50 DA 009253NIDA NIH HHS P50 DA009253NIDA NIH HHS R01 DA015597NIDA NIH HHS R01 DA 15597
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo report the effectiveness of a prenatal intervention and to provide evidence that prenatal visits provide an opportune time for health assessment and counseling with abused women.

methodsFifty ethnically diverse pregnant women who presented for routine prenatal care and who also reported being at risk for intimate partner violence (IPV) were recruited to the study. Participants were assigned to either usual care or the Video Doctor plus Provider Cueing intervention. At baseline and 1 month later at another routine prenatal visit, intervention group participants received a 15-minute Video Doctor assessment and interactive tailored counseling. Their providers received a printed Cue Sheet alert and suggested counseling statements. MAIN

findingsParticipants in the intervention group were significantly more likely to report provider-patient discussions of IPV compared with participants receiving usual care at baseline (81.8% vs. 16.7%; p < .001) and at the 1-month follow-up (70.0% vs. 23.5%; p = .005). Summing the number of patient-provider discussions across the two visits at baseline and 1 month later, intervention participants were significantly more likely to have IPV risk discussion with their providers at one or both visits (90.0% vs. 23.6%; p < .001) compared with the participants who received usual care. When specifically asked about the helpfulness of these IPV-related discussions, 20 out of 22 (90.9%) participants rated the discussion as helpful or very helpful at baseline and all 18 (100%) participants rated the discussion as helpful or very helpful at the 1-month follow-up.

conclusionVideo Doctor plus Provider Cueing intervention significantly increases the likelihood of provider-patient IPV discussion with pregnant women with a history of abuse.

Indexed as

Outcome and Process Assessment, Health CarePhysician-Patient RelationsVideo RecordingAdolescentAdultCounselingFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansInterpersonal RelationsLongitudinal StudiesMalePregnancyPrenatal CareSan FranciscoSocioeconomic Factors

Identifiers

PMID21185737
PMCPMC3053017

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.