Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29321125›Full record

Trial reportJournal of medical Internet research2018

Efficacy of a Web-Based Safety Decision Aid for Women Experiencing Intimate Partner Violence: Randomized Controlled Trial.

Jane Koziol-McLain, Alain C Vandal, Denise Wilson, Shyamala Nada-Raja, Terry Dobbs, Christine McLean, Rose Sisk, Karen B Eden, Nancy E Glass

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of medical Internet research, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 50 papers, 8 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
50citing papers in PubMed, 8 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

50 citing papers in PubMed, 8 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Interventions for Indigenous Peoples making health decisions: a systematic review.Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique · 2023
    Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. 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

9 authors.

Jane Koziol-McLainCentre for Interdisciplinary Trauma Research, Faculty of Health and Environmental Sciences, Auckland University of Technology, Auckland, New Zealand.ORCID 0000-0003-3453-023X
Alain C VandalDepartment of Biostatistics and Epidemiology, Faculty of Health and Environmental Sciences, Auckland University of Technology, Auckland, New Zealand.ORCID 0000-0002-3153-2953
Denise WilsonTaupua Waiora Centre for Māori Health Research, Faculty of Health and Environmental Sciences, Auckland University of Technology, Auckland, New Zealand.ORCID 0000-0001-9942-3561
Shyamala Nada-RajaDepartment of Preventive and Social Medicine, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand.ORCID 0000-0001-5743-4107
Terry DobbsCentre for Interdisciplinary Trauma Research, Faculty of Health and Environmental Sciences, Auckland University of Technology, Auckland, New Zealand.ORCID 0000-0002-9801-8326
Christine McLeanCentre for Interdisciplinary Trauma Research, Faculty of Health and Environmental Sciences, Auckland University of Technology, Auckland, New Zealand.ORCID 0000-0002-9781-7927
Rose SiskDepartment of Biostatistics and Epidemiology, Faculty of Health and Environmental Sciences, Auckland University of Technology, Auckland, New Zealand.ORCID 0000-0002-3354-6144
Karen B EdenDepartment of Medical Informatics and Clinical Epidemiology, School of Medicine, Oregon Health Sciences University, Portland, OR, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-8709-6292
Nancy E GlassJohns Hopkins Center for Global Health, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-6691-3684

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIntimate partner violence (IPV) is a human rights violation and leading health burden for women. Safety planning is a hallmark of specialist family violence intervention, yet only a small proportion of women access formal services. A Web-based safety decision aid may reach a wide audience of women experiencing IPV and offer the opportunity to prioritize and plan for safety for themselves and their families.

objectiveThe aim of this study was to test the efficacy of a Web-based safety decision aid (isafe) for women experiencing IPV.

methodsWe conducted a fully automated Web-based two-arm parallel randomized controlled trial (RCT) in a general population of New Zealand women who had experienced IPV in the past 6 months. Computer-generated randomization was based on a minimization scheme with stratification by severity of violence and children. Women were randomly assigned to the password-protected intervention website (safety priority setting, danger assessment, and tailored action plan components) or control website (standard, nonindividualized information). Primary endpoints were self-reported mental health (Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale-Revised, CESD-R) and IPV exposure (Severity of Violence Against Women Scale, SVAWS) at 12-month follow-up. Analyses were by intention to treat.

resultsWomen were recruited from September 2012 to September 2014. Participants were aged between 16 and 60 years, 27% (111/412) self-identified as Māori (indigenous New Zealand), and 51% (210/412) reported at baseline that they were unsure of their future plans for their partner relationship. Among the 412 women recruited, retention at 12 months was 87%. The adjusted estimated intervention effect for SVAWS was -12.44 (95% CI -23.35 to -1.54) for Māori and 0.76 (95% CI -5.57 to 7.09) for non-Māori. The adjusted intervention effect for CESD-R was -7.75 (95% CI -15.57 to 0.07) for Māori and 1.36 (-3.16 to 5.88) for non-Māori. No study-related adverse events were reported.

conclusionsThe interactive, individualized Web-based isafe decision aid was effective in reducing IPV exposure limited to indigenous Māori women. Discovery of a treatment effect in a population group that experiences significant health disparities is a welcome, important finding.

trial registrationAustralian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR): ACTRN12612000708853; https://www.anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?ACTRN=12612000708853 (Archived by Webcite at http://www.webcitation/61MGuVXdK).

Indexed as

Decision Support TechniquesInternetAdolescentAdultAustraliaDomestic ViolenceFemaleHumansIntimate Partner ViolenceMental HealthMiddle AgedNew ZealandSexual PartnersYoung AdultdepressioneHealthintimate partner violenceNew Zealandpopulation groupsrandomized controlled trial

Identifiers

PMID29321125
PMCPMC6858022

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.