ArticleBMC health services research2024
Views from midwives and perinatal nurses on barriers and facilitators in responding to perinatal intimate partner violence in Japan: baseline interview before intervention.
Article in BMC health services research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Psychological experiences and needs of perinatal women experiencing intimate partner violence: a qualitative meta-synthesis.Frontiers in public health · 2025Pooled it
- Intimate partner violence experience, support seeking and coping strategies among pregnant women in Southwestern Uganda.PLOS global public health · 2026Article
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
Abstract
backgroundMidwives and perinatal nurses play a crucial role in responding to intimate partner violence (IPV) against pregnant women; however, these roles are often not performed adequately. This study aimed to identify provider-related, healthcare system, and social barriers and facilitators to IPV response from the perspective of midwives and perinatal nurses.
methodsThis qualitative descriptive study used semi-structured interviews with five midwives and a nurse from perinatal care facilities in Tokyo, Japan. A framework approach was employed to analyze the interview transcripts.
resultsBarriers included inadequate knowledge about IPV and reluctance to provide support by healthcare providers. Barriers in the healthcare system included the absence of structural infrastructure for IPV response. This involved the lack of screening tool adoption, the partner's presence during interviews, and time constraints. Additionally, there was insufficient systematic and collaborative coordination within and outside the team. Another barrier was the lack of in-service training to develop IPV-related knowledge and skills. Finally, there was uncertainty about how the support at healthcare facilities impacts women's lives. Further barriers in the social system included the absence of additional reimbursement for IPV response. There was also a lack of a comprehensive approach to IPV that provides for the rehabilitation of perpetrators and care for the children of victims and a culture that discourages separation from the perpetrator. Conversely, facilitators included healthcare providers recognizing the perinatal period as an opportunity to address IPV. They also acknowledged IPV as a prevalent issue, practiced conscious self-care, and systematically collaborated within the healthcare team.
conclusionThis study emphasized the need for routine IPV screening in perinatal care and the importance of team-based educational interventions for healthcare providers to facilitate implementation.
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.