Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35709235›Full record

ArticlePloS one2022

Prosecutorial decision-making regarding offenders' social reintegration programs in intimate partner violence cases. A Portuguese study.

Paulo Vieira-Pinto, José Ignacio Muñoz-Barús, Tiago Taveira-Gomes, Maria João Vidal-Alves, Teresa Magalhães

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact, top 93% 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

0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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 at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Paulo Vieira-PintoInstitute of Forensic Sciences-Department of Forensic Sciences, Pathology, Gynecology and Obstetrics, Pediatrics, University of Santiago de Compostela, Santiago de Compostela, Spain.ORCID 0000-0002-8385-8293
José Ignacio Muñoz-BarúsInstitute of Forensic Sciences-Department of Forensic Sciences, Pathology, Gynecology and Obstetrics, Pediatrics, University of Santiago de Compostela, Santiago de Compostela, Spain.ORCID 0000-0002-4454-4670
Tiago Taveira-GomesTOXRUN-Toxicology Research Unit, University Institute of Health Sciences, CESPU, CRL, Gandra, Portugal.
Maria João Vidal-AlvesTOXRUN-Toxicology Research Unit, University Institute of Health Sciences, CESPU, CRL, Gandra, Portugal.
Teresa MagalhãesTOXRUN-Toxicology Research Unit, University Institute of Health Sciences, CESPU, CRL, Gandra, Portugal.
Universidade do Porto · PTFernando Pessoa University · PTUniversidade de Santiago de Compostela · ES

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Intimate partner violence is one of the most challenging and demanding problems that the criminal justice system has to face. Given the severe consequences of intimate partner violence, it is imperative that intervention from the criminal justice system, regarding perpetrators, be effective to prevent further victimization and recurrences. In Portugal, it is up to the state prosecutor to decide which cases will be subject to a social reintegration program as a pretrial diversion program. This study aims to explore the variables that might influence the state prosecutor's decision-making process. We have examined 283 intimate partner violence cases in which provisional suspension of criminal proceedings was applied. The decision as to whether defendants should be referred for social reintegration program attendance (G1) or not (G2) was made by the state prosecutor. Differences between G1 and G2 were identified: the victim's age, couple living in a current relationship, drug-addicted defendant, intimate partner violence child exposure. However, defendants' unemployment and drug abuse were the only two variables identified as a determinant for state prosecutor decisions. We believe that the effectiveness of state prosecution decision-making would benefit from: (a) systematically taking into account all intimate partner violence risk factors; (b) an index or checklist detailing what science reveals useful in intimate partner violence offenders' social reintegration; (c) rehabilitation solutions based on the needs of each offender instead of a "one-size-fits-all" approach.

Indexed as

Crime VictimsCriminalsIntimate Partner ViolenceDecision MakingEthnicityHumansPortugal

Identifiers

PMID35709235
PMCPMC9202915
OpenAlexW4283013116

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.