ArticleViolence against women2023
"Are You Safe at Home?": Clinician's Assessments for Intimate Partner Violence at the Initial Obstetric Visit.
Article in Violence against women, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Family Planning Providers' Assessment of Intimate Partner Violence and Substance Use.Journal of women's health (2002) · 2021Trial
- Patients' perspectives about sharing information with providers on social needs during pregnancy: a qualitative study.BMC health services research · 2025Article
- A Transdisciplinary Analysis of Domestic Violence Homicides in Harris County, Texas (2016-2020).Homicide studies · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Few studies have empirically examined patient-clinician conversations to assess how intimate partner violence (IPV) screening is performed. Our study sought to examine audio-recorded first obstetric encounters' IPV screening conversations to describe and categorize communication approaches and explore associations with patient disclosure. We analyzed 247 patient encounters with 47 providers. IPV screening occurred in 95% of visits: 57% used direct questions, 25% used indirect questions, 17% repeated IPV screening later in the visit, 11% framed questions with a reason for asking, and 10% described IPV types. Patients disclosed IPV in 71 (28.7%) visits. There were no associations between disclosure and any categories of IPV screening.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.