Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36962238›Full record

ArticlePLOS global public health2022

Staff perspectives on the impact of COVID 19 on the delivery of specialist domestic abuse services in the UK: A qualitative study.

Helen Riddell, Catherine Haighton

Open access · goldFull text read
In one paragraph

Article in PLOS global public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 37% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
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

2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Helen RiddellFaculty of Health and Life Sciences, Northumbria University, Newcastle upon Tyne, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6541-7582
Catherine HaightonFaculty of Health and Life Sciences, Northumbria University, Newcastle upon Tyne, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8061-0428
Durham County Council · GBNorthumbria University · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Domestic abuse is a significant public health issue effecting 2.4 million adults in England and Wales each year. In March 2020 the World Health Organisation declared a global pandemic following the outbreak of COVID-19. As a result, the UK moved to a period of lockdown. There is growing evidence that highlights the unintended negative consequences of lockdown, particularly in households where abuse is present. The aim of this study was to explore the experiences of frontline specialist domestic abuse staff who continued to support victims during the period of lockdown to understand the impact of COVID-19 on service delivery. Ten, one to one, semi structured qualitative interviews were carried out with staff from a specialist domestic abuse service that operates in regions across the north-east of England. All participants had been involved in service delivery for a minimum of 12 months prior to March 2020 and had continued to deliver services throughout the UK initial lockdown period between March and July 2020. Each interview was transcribed verbatim, anonymised, then subjected to thematic analysis. Six themes were developed from the data covering: emergency support for victims; wider service efficiencies; victim safety; group work versus one-to-one support; criminal and family courts; and workforce development. While lockdown resulted in increased levels and severity of referrals, the switch to remote working brought a range of service efficiencies including time and money saved by negating the need to travel. Remote working also enhanced support offered to male victims and those with mental health issues but not those in rural locations with poor connectivity and those effected by the digital divide. Services should not underestimate the long-term benefits of peer support both to clients and staffs.

Identifiers

PMID36962238
PMCPMC10021249
OpenAlexW4229079309

What OpenQuestion holds

Textfull text, public
LicenceCC BY
measurements read7
identifiers read1
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.