Observational studyWomen's health (London, England)
Utilization of Norwegian crisis shelters before and during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Observational study in Women's health (London, England). The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe measures introduced to control the COVID-19 pandemic, including lockdowns and physical distancing, exerted considerable influence on society.
objectivesThe aims of this study were to examine (1) the prevalence of people seeking Norwegian crisis shelters for domestic violence during the first period of the COVID-19 pandemic (2020) compared to the year before, (2) the demography and type of violence among first-time visitors and (3) to compare the utilization of the crisis shelters and characteristics of the users between shelters in the capital and the other shelters throughout Norway.
designObservational study.
methodThe study was based on data from each crisis shelter in 2019 and 2020. Comparison between the 2 years were based on corresponding periods (12 March until 31 December) and analysed with
resultsTotal use of crises centres, residential stays and daytime visits were lower during the pandemic (n = 7102) compared to the pre-pandemic period (n = 11 814). There was a shift from daytime visits to phone contacts when the restrictions were established. There was a higher proportion of residential stays versus daytime visits during the pandemic (21.5%) compared to the pre-pandemic period (15.4%) (p ⩽ 0.001). The proportion of first-time users was higher during the pandemic compared to pre-pandemic period both for residents (52.4% vs 47.1%) and daytime visitors (10.9% vs 9.0%). Among first-time crisis shelter residents during the pandemic period, fewer reported having children at home compared to the pre-pandemic period. The background of the crisis-shelter users did not differ between the capital and rest of Norway, but the capital had relatively more residents with psychological violence and threats during the pandemic.
conclusionThe utilization of Norwegian crisis shelters, especially daytime visits was lower during the pandemic. There was a shift in daytime contacts from visits to phone contact at the pandemic outbreak. To ensure that information about available crisis shelters reaches the total population, these shelters should be prepared for a higher volume of phone contacts in a future pandemic situation.
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.