ArticlePRiMER (Leawood, Kan.)2025
Physician Responses to Patients Experiencing Intimate Partner Violence.
Article in PRiMER (Leawood, Kan.), 2025. 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.
- "Support us, so we can rise": A qualitative exploration of Latinas' expectations of healthcare providers after intimate partner violence.Women's health (London, England)Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: While guidelines exist for physicians to identify and respond to patients experiencing intimate partner violence (IPV), no studies describe physician practices of making mandated reports, advising patients about confidentiality limitations, or conducting homicide risk assessment. This pilot study aimed to explore current physician responses to patient disclosure of experiencing IPV. Methods: We sent interview invitations from March to August 2022 to 11 US national medical societies and 118 state chapters for family medicine, general internal medicine, obstetrics and gynecology, emergency medicine, and plastic surgery. We conducted semi-structured qualitative online interviews that were recorded and transcribed. We conducted a thematic analysis to determine codes and themes. Results: Participants consisted of ten female and three male physicians with a median of 16 years in practice. Analysis revealed two themes based on self-reported knowledge and actions: (1) limited knowledge and use of mandatory reporting and risk assessment, and (2) reliance on team members due to limited protocol awareness and time. Most participants did not recall reporting requirements, and few physicians described reporting IPV to law enforcement, advising patients of confidentiality limitations, or conducting risk assessments. As a result of time barriers and limited expertise about protocols and resources, participants relied on social work and nursing team members to respond to IPV. Conclusions: Physicians in this sample describe limited knowledge and use of mandatory reporting and safety assessment. These limitations can be further investigated in larger studies to determine the need for trainings that include reporting requirements and for developing IPV response protocols.
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.