Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35978583›Full record

ArticlePsychology of violence2020

Community Actionists: Understanding Adult Bystanders to Sexual and Domestic Violence Prevention in Communities.

Victoria L Banyard, Andrew Rizzo, Katie M Edwards

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Psychology of violence, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 12% 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 32 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Changes in Collective Efficacy's Preventive Effect on Intimate Partner Violence during the COVID-19 Pandemic.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Victoria L BanyardRutgers University.
Andrew RizzoUniversity of New Hampshire.
Katie M EdwardsUniversity of New Hampshire.
University of New Hampshire at Manchester · USRutgers Sexual and Reproductive Health and Rights · NL

Funding

ACL HHS U01CE002652NCIPC CDC HHS U01 CE002652
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objectives: Researchers and practitioners are becoming increasingly aware that domestic and sexual violence (DSV) can be addressed at the community level by involving bystanders (or Methods: We surveyed 1,623 adults (age range = 18 and over; 95% White; 52% female) across four rural communities in New England using direct mail methods. We asked participants about their perceived opportunities for taking action in the face of acute DSV risk and about any such actions they had taken in their communities during the past year. We also asked about participants' perceptions of community prevention-related social norms. From this data, we calculated prevention action ratios that resulted in three groups of actionists: non-responders, occasional responders, and frequent responders. Results: Individuals who more consistently responded to DSV reported positive perceptions of community social norms and processes. The most involved group of actionists had stronger perceptions of injunctive community norms. Conclusions: Results suggest that prevention strategies that aim to change social norms among adults may enhance prevention outcomes in communities.

Indexed as

bystandercommunitydomestic violencepreventionsexual violencesocial norms

Identifiers

PMID35978583
PMCPMC9380616
OpenAlexW3007817056

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.