Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32576145›Full record

ArticleBMC family practice2020

Sharing reports about domestic violence and abuse with general practitioners: a qualitative interview study.

Katherine Pitt, Sandi Dheensa, Gene Feder, Emma Johnson, Mei-See Man, Jessica Roy, Emma Williamson, Eszter Szilassy

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC family practice, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

8 authors.

Katherine PittBristol Medical School (Population Health Sciences), University of Bristol, Canynge Hall, 39 Whatley Road, Bristol, BS8 2PS, UK. kate.pitt@bristol.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0001-5404-6301
Sandi DheensaBristol Medical School (Population Health Sciences), University of Bristol, Canynge Hall, 39 Whatley Road, Bristol, BS8 2PS, UK.
Gene FederBristol Medical School (Population Health Sciences), University of Bristol, Canynge Hall, 39 Whatley Road, Bristol, BS8 2PS, UK.
Emma JohnsonBristol Medical School (Population Health Sciences), University of Bristol, Canynge Hall, 39 Whatley Road, Bristol, BS8 2PS, UK.
Mei-See ManBristol Medical School (Population Health Sciences), University of Bristol, Canynge Hall, 39 Whatley Road, Bristol, BS8 2PS, UK.
Jessica RoySchool for Policy Studies, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
Emma WilliamsonSchool for Policy Studies, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
Eszter SzilassyBristol Medical School (Population Health Sciences), University of Bristol, Canynge Hall, 39 Whatley Road, Bristol, BS8 2PS, UK.

Funding

National Institute for Health Research Academic Clinical FellowshipNational Institute for Health Research RP-PG-0614-20012
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDomestic violence and abuse (DVA) is common and damaging to health. UK national guidance advocates a multi-agency response to DVA, and domestic homicide reviews consistently recommend improved information-sharing between agencies. Identification of patients experiencing DVA in general practice may come from external information shared with the practice, such as police incident reports and multi-agency risk assessment conference (MARAC) reports. The aim of this study was to explore the views of general practitioners (GPs) and the police about sharing reports about DVA with GPs.

methodsQualitative semi-structured interviews were conducted with GPs, police staff and a partnership manager. Participants were located across England and Wales. Thematic analysis was undertaken.

resultsInterviews were conducted with 23 GPs, six police staff and one former partnership manager. Experiences of information-sharing with GPs about DVA varied. Participants described the relevance and value of external reports to GPs to help address the health consequences of DVA and safeguard patients. They balanced competing priorities when managing this information in the electronic medical record, namely visibility to GPs versus the risk of unintended disclosure to patients. GPs also spoke of the judgements they made about exploring DVA with patients based on external reports, which varied between abusive and non-abusive adults and children. Some felt constrained by short general practice consultations. Some police and GPs reflected on a loss of control when information about DVA was shared between agencies, and the risk of unintended consequences. Both police and GPs highlighted the importance of clear information and a shared understanding about responsibility for action.

conclusionGPs regarded external reports about DVA as relevant to their role, but safely recording this information in the electronic medical record and using it to support patients required complex judgements. Both GPs and police staff emphasised the importance of clarity of information and responsibility for action when information was shared between agencies about patients affected by DVA.

Indexed as

Domestic ViolenceInformation DisseminationInterprofessional RelationsLaw EnforcementPhysical AbuseAdultChildElectronic Health RecordsFemaleGeneral PractitionersHumansInterdisciplinary CommunicationMalePhysician's RolePolicePrimary Health CareDomestic violence and abuse (DVA)Electronic medical records (EMR)General practiceInformation-sharingIntimate partner violence (IPV)Multi-agencyPolicePrimary care

Identifiers

PMID32576145
PMCPMC7313185

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.