ArticleHeliyon2024
Barriers to routine screening for intimate partner violence during pregnancy in Nigeria.
Article in Heliyon, 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The benefits of routine screening for intimate partner violence (IPV) among pregnant women include early identification, prompt management, referral of IPV victims, and creating awareness about IPV. Despite these benefits, the practice of routine screening of IPV remains limited in midwifery settings in low-income countries. The purpose of this study is to identify and describe midwives' perspectives of the barriers in conducting routine screening of IPV for pregnant women in northern Nigeria. Methods: A case study qualitative descriptive design was used to collect data from ten midwives in the antenatal clinic of a tertiary hospital. Non-participant observation and individual face-to-face semi-structured interviews were used as data collection methods. Thematic data analysis was carried out using Yin's five stage analytical cycle. Findings: Three themes, with related subthemes, emerged from the data: (i) The theme of "Internal" barriers to IPV screening has four subthemes; midwives' personal discomfort in asking IPV- related questions, perceived mistrust of midwives by pregnant women, midwives' own perceptions of IPV as a personal matter, and midwives' lack of skills to screen for IPV. (ii) "External" barriers to IPV screening subsumes three subthemes: antenatal card related barriers, workload related barriers, and protocol barriers. (iii) "Structural" barriers to IPV screening have two subthemes: lack of space for privacy and lack of resources for managing pregnant women who have experienced IPV. Conclusion: Knowing the barriers to midwives' screening practices is important because it may help in the development of contextually relevant and acceptable screening guidelines for midwives in Nigeria. Education and training of midwives will eliminate the internal barriers while the external barriers will need the intervention of hospital authorities and government to eliminate their effects on 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.