SynthesisPloS one2024
Evaluation of the measurement properties of intimate partner violence screening instruments for the general population: A COSMIN-based international systematic review.
Synthesis in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Perceived Healthcare Interventions and Clinical Strategies Against Dating Violence: A Qualitative Exploration of Expert and Nursing Perspectives.Nursing reports (Pavia, Italy) · 2026Article
- A Decision-Making Framework for Selecting Intimate Partner Violence Measures in Health Research.Journal of nursing scholarship : an official publication of Sigma Theta Tau International Honor Society of Nursing · 2026Review
- Cross-cultural adaptation and psychometric validation of the Woman Abuse Screening Tool (WAST) in Ecuadorian adult women.BMC psychology · 2026Article
- Geospatial analysis of healthcare and older adult care institutions in Wuhan: a multimethod approach to assessing spatial equity.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimTo systematically appraise, compare, and summarize the measurement properties of intimate partner violence screening instruments for the general population and provide recommendations.
methodsWe searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global and EBSCO Psychology Behavioral Sciences Collection from their establishment to March 2024 using systematic search strategies. The methodological quality of the instruments that met the inclusion criteria and their measurement properties were assessed using the COSMIN methodology, and the COSMIN recommendations were followed. We reported this study using PRISMA 2020 checklist.
resultsA total of 23 studies were eventually included, and 18 instruments were identified. The evaluation of the methodological quality indicates poor content validity but good structural validity; however, that of the criterion validity in most of the studies was inadequate. Measurement error and responsiveness were not assessed. Four screening instruments could be used in the interim. The remaining 14 instruments were not recommended for use.
conclusionsThe overall methodological quality of most of the assessed instruments was insufficient. A rigorous intimate partner violence screening instrument with good measurement properties is urgently required to identify and screen for intimate partner violence in the general population. PROSPERO NUMBER: CRD42022365247.
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.