Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23866771›Full record

Trial reportTrials2013

Psychological advocacy toward healing (PATH): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

Gwen Brierley, Roxane Agnew-Davies, Jayne Bailey, Maggie Evans, Morgan Fackrell, Giulia Ferrari, Sandra Hollinghurst, Louise Howard, Emma Howarth, Alice Malpass and 6 more

Abstract readMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Trials, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Psychological therapies for women who experience intimate partner violence.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2020
    Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Help-seeking amongst women survivors of domestic violence: a qualitative study of pathways towards formal and informal support.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2016
    Article
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

16 authors.

Gwen BrierleyCentre for Academic Primary Care, School of Social and Community Medicine, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
Roxane Agnew-Davies
Jayne Bailey
Maggie Evans
Morgan Fackrell
Giulia Ferrari
Sandra Hollinghurst
Louise Howard
Emma Howarth
Alice Malpass
Carol Metters
Tim J Peters
Fayeza Saeed
Lynnmarie Sardhina
Debbie Sharp
Gene S Feder

Funding

Department of Health RP-PG-0108-10084Medical Research Council G0800800
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDomestic violence and abuse (DVA), defined as threatening behavior or abuse by adults who are intimate partners or family members, is a key public health and clinical priority. The prevalence of DVA in the United Kingdom and worldwide is high, and its impact on physical and mental health is detrimental and persistent. There is currently little support within healthcare settings for women experiencing DVA. Psychological problems in particular may be difficult to manage outside specialist services, as conventional forms of therapy such as counseling that do not address the violence may be ineffective or even harmful. The aim of this study is to assess the overall effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a novel psychological intervention tailored specifically for survivors of DVA and delivered by domestic violence advocates based in third-sector organizations. METHODS AND STUDY

designThis study is an open, pragmatic, parallel group, individually randomized controlled trial. Women ages 16 years and older experiencing domestic violence are being enrolled and randomly allocated to receive usual DVA agency advocacy support (control) or usual DVA agency support plus psychological intervention (intervention). Those in the intervention group will receive eight specialist psychological advocacy (SPA) sessions weekly or fortnightly, with two follow-up sessions, 1 month and then 3 months later. This will be in addition to any advocacy support sessions each woman receives. Women in the control group will receive usual DVA agency support but no additional SPA sessions. The aim is to recruit 250 women to reach the target sample size. The primary outcomes are psychological well-being and depression severity at 1 yr from baseline, as measured by the Clinical Outcomes in Routine Evaluation-Outcome Measure (CORE-OM) and the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9), respectively. Secondary outcome measures include anxiety, posttraumatic stress, severity and frequency of abuse, quality of life and cost-effectiveness of the intervention. Data from a subsample of women in both groups will contribute to a nested qualitative study with repeat interviews during the year of follow-up. DISCUSSION: This study will contribute to the evidence base for management of the psychological needs of women experiencing DVA. The findings will have important implications for healthcare commissioners and providers, as well as third sector specialist DVA agencies providing services to this client group.

trial registrationISRCTN58561170.

Indexed as

Mental HealthMental Health ServicesPatient AdvocacyResearch DesignWomen's Health ServicesAdolescentAdultAnxietyCost-Benefit AnalysisDepressionDomestic ViolenceFemaleHealth Care CostsHumansMental DisordersModels, Psychological

Identifiers

PMID23866771
PMCPMC3718639

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.