Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39748350›Full record

ArticleBMC public health2025

Service preferences among postpartum women (non-)affected by different types of intimate partner violence: insights from the cross-sectional study INVITE.

Laura M Hausmann, Lara Seefeld, Amera Mojahed, Judith T Mack, Susan Garthus-Niegel, Julia Schellong

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Laura M HausmannInstitute and Policlinic of Occupational and Social Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, TUD Dresden University of Technology, Dresden, Germany.
Lara SeefeldInstitute and Policlinic of Occupational and Social Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, TUD Dresden University of Technology, Dresden, Germany.
Amera MojahedDepartment of Psychotherapy and Psychosomatic Medicine, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, TUD Dresden University of Technology, Dresden, Germany.
Judith T MackInstitute and Policlinic of Occupational and Social Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, TUD Dresden University of Technology, Dresden, Germany.
Susan Garthus-Niegel *Institute and Policlinic of Occupational and Social Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, TUD Dresden University of Technology, Dresden, Germany. Susan.Garthus-Niegel@ukdd.de.
Julia Schellong *Department of Psychotherapy and Psychosomatic Medicine, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, TUD Dresden University of Technology, Dresden, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWomen in the postpartum period are at greater risk of intimate partner violence (IPV), which may cause physical, sexual, or psychological harm and have a long-lasting negative impact on mother and child. Seeking help in case of IPV in the postpartum period can be difficult.

objectiveThe purpose of this study was to examine service preferences among postpartum women in Germany (non-)affected by IPV.

methodsIn the cross-sectional study INVITE, postpartum mothers (n = 3,509) were interviewed via telephone. Using the WHO-Violence Against Women Instrument (WHO-VAWI), women were divided into groups: non-affected women and women affected by psychological, physical, and/or sexual IPV. Using analyses of variance, group differences regarding preferred services and modes of service provision were assessed. Examined service domains were psychosocial services (e.g., women´s shelter or self-help groups), medical services (e.g., gynecologist or emergency room), and midwives. Modes of service provision included direct communication (e.g., in person or video conference) and indirect communication (e.g., chat or e-mail).

resultsPeople from the women's social environment (e.g., family, friends) and specialized IPV services, such as women's shelters, were the most preferred support. Regarding service categories, women who experienced any type of IPV rated all three service domains less likely to be used than non-affected women. Most preferred provision mode was "in person". Women affected by physical and/or sexual IPV rated direct modes more negatively than non-affected women. However, there were no differences between (non-)affected women regarding indirect modes, such as e-mails or apps. DISCUSSION: The present results indicate that services were rated less likely to be used by postpartum women affected by IPV. Potential barriers which lead to these ratings need to be investigated. Efforts should be made to increase awareness of IPV and the beneficial effects of support.

Indexed as

Intimate Partner ViolencePostpartum PeriodAdultCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleGermanyHumansPatient PreferenceYoung AdultCross-sectional studyHelp seekingIntimate partner violenceINVITE studyPostpartum periodService preferencesService provision

Identifiers

PMID39748350
PMCPMC11694455

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.