Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35537445›Full record

ArticleTrauma, violence & abuse2023

Technology-Facilitated Abuse in Intimate Relationships: A Scoping Review.

Michaela M Rogers, Colleen Fisher, Parveen Ali, Peter Allmark, Lisa Fontes

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in Trauma, violence & abuse, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed
–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

22 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  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

5 authors.

Michaela M RogersThe University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-7214-4375
Colleen FisherUniversity of Western Australia, Crawley, AU-WA, Australia.
Parveen AliThe University of Sheffield and Doncaster and Bassetlaw Teaching Hospitals, Sheffield, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-7839-8130
Peter AllmarkThe University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK.
Lisa FontesUniversity of Massachusetts Amherst, Amherst, MA, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Technology-facilitated abuse (TFA) is a significant, harmful phenomenon and emerging trend in intimate partner violence. TFA encompasses a range of behaviours and is facilitated in online spaces (on social media and networking platforms) and through the misuse of everyday technology (e.g. mobile phone misuse, surveillance apps, spyware, surveillance via video cameras and so on). The body of work on TFA in intimate relationships is emerging, and so this scoping review set out to establish what types of abuse, impacts and forms of resistance are reported in current studies. The scoping review examined studies between 2000 and 2020 that focused on TFA within intimate partnerships (adults aged 18+) within the setting of any of these countries: the UK and Ireland, USA, Canada, New Zealand and Australia. The databases MEDLINE, CINAHL and Scopus were searched in December 2020. A total of 22 studies were included in the review. The main findings were that TFA is diverse in its presentation and tactics, but can be typed according to the eight domains of the Duluth Power & Control Wheel. Impacts are not routinely reported across studies but broadly fall into the categories of social, mental health and financial impacts and omnipresence. Similarly, modes of resistance are infrequently reported in studies. In the few studies that described victim/survivor resistance, this was in the context of direct action, access to legal or professional support or in the identification of barriers to resistance.

Indexed as

Intimate Partner ViolenceSexual BehaviorAdultAustraliaHumansSexual PartnersTechnologycyber abusecyber harassmentdigital coercive controltechnology-facilitated coercive control

Identifiers

PMID35537445
PMCPMC10486147

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.