Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32791967›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2020

Patient and provider barriers, facilitators, and implementation preferences of intimate partner violence perpetration screening.

Galina A Portnoy, Richard Colon, Georgina M Gross, Lynette J Adams, Lori A Bastian, Katherine M Iverson

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.3field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
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

21 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 43 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  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 at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Galina A PortnoyVA Connecticut Healthcare System, VA PRIME Center, 950 Campbell Ave, West Haven, CT, 06516, USA. galina.portnoy@va.gov.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5379-7709
Richard ColonVA Connecticut Healthcare System, VA PRIME Center, 950 Campbell Ave, West Haven, CT, 06516, USA.
Georgina M GrossVA Connecticut Healthcare System, VA PRIME Center, 950 Campbell Ave, West Haven, CT, 06516, USA.
Lynette J AdamsVA Connecticut Healthcare System, VA PRIME Center, 950 Campbell Ave, West Haven, CT, 06516, USA.
Lori A BastianVA Connecticut Healthcare System, VA PRIME Center, 950 Campbell Ave, West Haven, CT, 06516, USA.
Katherine M IversonWomen's Health Sciences Division, National Center for PTSD, VA Boston Healthcare System, Boston, MA, USA.
Yale University · USBoston University · USVA Connecticut Healthcare System · US

Funding

HSRD VA IK2 HX002897
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe substantial prevalence and consequences of intimate partner violence (IPV) underscore the need for effective healthcare response in the way of screening and follow up care. Despite growing evidence regarding perspectives on healthcare-based screening for IPV experiences (i.e., victimization), there is an extremely limited evidence-base to inform practice and policy for detecting IPV use (i.e., perpetration). This study identified barriers, facilitators, and implementation preferences among United States (US) Veterans Health Administration (VHA) patients and providers for IPV use screening.

methodsWe conducted qualitative interviews with patients enrolled in VHA healthcare (N = 10) and focus groups with VHA providers across professional disciplines (N = 29). Data was analyzed using thematic and content analyses.

resultsQualitative analysis revealed convergence between patients' and providers' beliefs regarding key factors for IPV use screening, including the importance of a strong rapport, clear and comprehensive processes and procedures, universal implementation of screening, and a self-report screening tool that assesses for both IPV use and experiences concurrently.

conclusionsFindings provide foundational information regarding patient and provider barriers, facilitators, and preferences for IPV use screening that can inform clinical practice and next steps in this important but understudied aspect of healthcare.

Indexed as

Health Services AccessibilityAdultAgedFemaleFocus GroupsHealth Services ResearchHumansIntimate Partner ViolenceMaleMass ScreeningMiddle AgedPatient PreferenceQualitative ResearchUnited StatesUnited States Department of Veterans AffairsHealthcare needsHealthcare responseIntimate partner violencePatient preferencesProvider preferencesScreeningViolence perpetration

Identifiers

PMID32791967
PMCPMC7424651
OpenAlexW3048714508

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.