ArticleTrauma, violence & abuse2024
Coercive Control in 2SLGBTQQIA+ Relationships: A Scoping Review.
Article in Trauma, violence & abuse, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Existing measures and theories of intimate partner coercive control largely evaluate men's coercion of women. The extent of knowledge pertaining to intimate relationships among other genders and sexual identities is unclear. Guided by a theoretical framework of intersectionality, we examined and synthesized original studies on coercive control by (perpetration) or against (victimization) Two Spirit, lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans, queer, questioning, intersex, and asexual individuals within intimate partner relationships. We searched eight academic databases for records from 2014 through 2022 and hand-searched review articles' reference lists, supplemented with gray literature and website searches. Using duplicate screening, we identified 1,774 unique documents; 526 met preliminary eligibility criteria and 277 were retained for data extraction in duplicate. Coercive control was more common among minority individuals and was related to mental health challenges. Few studies reported on gender- or sexual-identity specific forms of coercive control, and an intersectional focus was uncommon. This review revealed a lack of agreed definition of coercive control or accepted standard of measurement, and a gap in research with individuals who identify as gender diverse, gender fluid or intersex, or those identifying their sexuality as asexual, pansexual, or sexually diverse.
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.