Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31399073›Full record

ArticleSystematic reviews2019

The psychological subtype of intimate partner violence and its effect on mental health: protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Sarah Dokkedahl, Robin Niels Kok, Siobhan Murphy, Trine Rønde Kristensen, Ditte Bech-Hansen, Ask Elklit

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Systematic reviews, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 37 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
37citing papers in PubMed, 4 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

37 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  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

6 authors.

Sarah DokkedahlNational Centre of Psychotraumatology, Department of Psychology at the University of Southern Denmark, 5230, Odense M, Denmark. sdokkedahl@health.sdu.dk.ORCID 0000-0003-3090-4660
Robin Niels KokDepartment of Psychology at the University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark.
Siobhan MurphyNational Centre of Psychotraumatology, Department of Psychology at the University of Southern Denmark, 5230, Odense M, Denmark.
Trine Rønde KristensenCentre for persons subjected to violence, Frederiksberg Hospital, Frederiksberg, Denmark.
Ditte Bech-HansenNational Centre of Psychotraumatology, Department of Psychology at the University of Southern Denmark, 5230, Odense M, Denmark.
Ask ElklitNational Centre of Psychotraumatology, Department of Psychology at the University of Southern Denmark, 5230, Odense M, Denmark.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND/

aimPsychological violence is estimated to be the most common form of intimate partner violence (IPV). Despite this, research on the independent effect of psychological violence on mental health is scarce. Moreover, the lack of a clear and consistent definition of psychological violence has made results difficult to compare. The present study therefore aims to consolidate knowledge on psychological violence by conducting a systematic review and random-effects meta-analysis on the association between psychological violence and mental health problems, when controlling for other types of violence (e.g. physical and sexual) and taking into account severity, frequency, and duration of psychological violence.

methodThe present study is registered in the International Prospective Register for Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO; #CRD42018116026) and the study design follows the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA; Additional file 1). A dual search will be conducted in the electronic databases PsycINFO, PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science. Data will be extracted using Endnote and Covidence and a meta-analysis will be conducted using Metafor-package in the programming language R. The Quality Assessment Tool for Quantitative Studies developed by the Effective Public Health Practice Project will be used to assess the quality of the included studies (i.e. weak, moderate and strong). RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: The present review will help consolidate knowledge on psychological violence by evaluating whether frequency, severity or actual "type" of psychological violence produces the most harm. A thorough quality assessment will help overcome potential limitations regarding expected variations in terminology and assessment of psychological violence. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42018116026 .

Indexed as

AggressionIntimate Partner ViolenceMental DisordersStress Disorders, Post-TraumaticCoercionHumansMeta-Analysis as TopicPsychological DistressSystematic Reviews as TopicAbbreviationsAggressionAssessmentCoercionDSM Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disordersEIGE European Institute of Gender EqualityEmotional abuse, Intimate partner violenceICD International Classification of DiseasesIPV Intimate Partner ViolenceMental healthNICE National Institute for Health and Care ExcellencePMWI Psychological Maltreatment of Women InventoryPsychological violencePsychometricsPTSDPTSD Posttraumatic Stress Disorder

Identifiers

PMID31399073
PMCPMC6688298

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.