ArticleGlobal health, science and practice2024
Risk for Severe Intimate Partner Violence in Nairobi's Informal Settlements: Tailoring the Danger Assessment to Kenya.
Article in Global health, science and practice, 2024. 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.
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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionUnderstanding the risk for severe intimate partner violence (IPV) can help women and providers assess danger. The validated, widely used Danger Assessment (DA) developed for this purpose has not been tested in a low- and middle-income country (LMIC). We tailored the DA to Nairobi, Kenya, and prospectively evaluated baseline danger against severe IPV at 3-month follow-up.
methodsWe used data from the myPlan Kenya trial conducted in 3 informal settlements in Nairobi, Kenya, from 2017 to 2018. DA items were refined through formative and pilot phases, yielding minor wording modifications. Quantitative analyses prospectively evaluated baseline DA against severe IPV at 3-month follow-up to understand the predictive effect of the (1) original 20-item DA, (2) 16-item Kenya-DA (highest relative risk ratios [RRR] with severe IPV), and (3) 16-item Kenya-DA weighted (weighting based on strength of RRRs). Diagnostic criteria, including C-statistics, sensitivity, specificity, receiver operating characteristic curve, and area under the curve, were examined; logistic regressions quantified the odds of each metric predicting severe IPV at follow-up.
resultsThe original 20-item DA produced the highest specificity (75.41%) and lowest sensitivity (57.14%), resulting in the overall lowest C-statistic. Compared to the 16-item Kenya-DA, the Kenya-DA weighted produced slightly higher sensitivity (66.67% vs. 64.29%) and specificity (77.05% vs. 72.13%), resulting in the highest C-statistic (0.78 vs. 0.75). All versions successfully predicted severe IPV at 3-month follow-up (original DA: odds ratio [OR]=1.26, 95% confidence interval [CI]=1.12, 1.41,
conclusionWithin a high-danger LMIC context, all 3 DA configurations performed well diagnostically. We recommend the 16-item Kenya-DA given the value for simplicity and field implementation, whereas the Kenya-DA weighted can add accuracy for research purposes.
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.