Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37368485›Full record

Trial reportJournal of medical Internet research2023

Effectiveness of the SAFE eHealth Intervention for Women Experiencing Intimate Partner Violence and Abuse: Randomized Controlled Trial, Quantitative Process Evaluation, and Open Feasibility Study.

Nicole E van Gelder, Suzanne A Ligthart, Karin Awl van Rosmalen-Nooijens, Judith B Prins, Sabine Oertelt-Prigione

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of medical Internet research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
1.9field-weighted citation impact, top 15% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. 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

5 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.

Nicole E van GelderDepartment of Primary and Community Care, Research Institute for Medical Innovation, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-2565-6914
Suzanne A LigthartDepartment of Primary and Community Care, Research Institute for Medical Innovation, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-3216-1928
Karin Awl van Rosmalen-NooijensDepartment of Primary and Community Care, Research Institute for Medical Innovation, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-9768-5565
Judith B PrinsDepartment of Medical Psychology, Research Institute for Medical Innovation, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-5720-6091
Sabine Oertelt-PrigioneDepartment of Primary and Community Care, Research Institute for Medical Innovation, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-3856-3864
Radboud University Nijmegen · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIntimate partner violence and abuse (IPVA) is a pervasive societal issue that impacts many women globally. Web-based help options are becoming increasingly available and have the ability to eliminate certain barriers in help seeking for IPVA, especially in improving accessibility.

objectiveThis study focused on the quantitative evaluation of the SAFE eHealth intervention for women IPVA survivors.

methodsA total of 198 women who experienced IPVA participated in a randomized controlled trial and quantitative process evaluation. Participants were largely recruited on the internet and signed up through self-referral. They were allocated (blinded for the participants) to (1) the intervention group (N=99) with access to a complete version of a help website containing 4 modules on IPVA, support options, mental health, and social support, and with interactive components such as a chat, or (2) the limited-intervention control group (N=99). Data were gathered about self-efficacy, depression, anxiety, and multiple feasibility aspects. The primary outcome was self-efficacy at 6 months. The process evaluation focused on themes, such as ease of use and feeling helped. In an open feasibility study (OFS; N=170), we assessed demand, implementation, and practicality. All data for this study were collected through web-based self-report questionnaires and automatically registered web-based data such as page visits and amount of logins.

resultsWe found no significant difference over time between groups for self-efficacy, depression, anxiety, fear of partner, awareness, and perceived support. However, both study arms showed significantly decreased scores for anxiety and fear of partner. Most participants in both groups were satisfied, but the intervention group showed significantly higher scores for suitability and feeling helped. However, we encountered high attrition for the follow-up surveys. Furthermore, the intervention was positively evaluated on multiple feasibility aspects. The average amount of logins did not significantly differ between the study arms, but participants in the intervention arm did spend significantly more time on the website. An increase in registrations during the OFS (N=170) was identified: the mean amount of registrations per month was 13.2 during the randomized controlled trial and 56.7 during the OFS.

conclusionsOur findings did not show a significant difference in outcomes between the extensive SAFE intervention and the limited-intervention control group. It is, however, difficult to quantify the real contribution of the interactive components, as the control group also had access to a limited version of the intervention for ethical reasons. Both groups were satisfied with the intervention they received, with the intervention study arm significantly more so than the control study arm. Integrated and multilayered approaches are needed to aptly quantify the impact of web-based IPVA interventions for survivors.

trial registrationNetherlands Trial Register NL7108 NTR7313; https://trialsearch.who.int/Trial2.aspx?TrialID=NTR7313.

Indexed as

Intimate Partner ViolenceTelemedicineAdolescentAdultAnxietyFeasibility StudiesFemaleHelp-Seeking BehaviorHumansInternet-Based InterventionMiddle AgedSelf EfficacySurveys and Questionnairesdomestic violence and abuseeHealthfeasibilityhelp seekingintimate partner violence and abusemental healthrandomized controlled trialself-efficacyweb basedweb-based intervention

Identifiers

PMID37368485
PMCPMC10337397
OpenAlexW4382182380

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.