Trial reportBMJ global health2025
Effectiveness of a clinic-based counselling intervention on risk of experiencing intimate partner violence and reproductive coercion: a matched-pair cluster-controlled trial in Ebonyi and Sokoto, Nigeria.
Trial report in BMJ global health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05331508 (Testing the Integration of Gender-based Violence First-line Response in Family Planning and Antenatal Care Services in Nigeria), which is not on this 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.
Testing the Integration of Gender-based Violence First-line Response in Family Planning and Antenatal Care Services in Nigeria
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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionDespite the high rates of intimate partner violence (IPV) globally and the negative impact of IPV and reproductive coercion (RC) on reproductive and maternal health outcomes, few clinic-based interventions to address IPV and RC in clinical contexts have demonstrated effectiveness. The WHO's LIVES (Listen, Inquire, Validate, Enhance safety, Support), and the Addressing Reproductive Coercion in the Health Setting (ARCHES) intervention have been tested with mixed effects. Our study tested the effectiveness of a combination of LIVES and ARCHES within family planning (FP) and antenatal care (ANC) services at public health facilities in Ebonyi and Sokoto, Nigeria.
methodsThe study used a quasi-experimental, matched-pair, cluster-controlled design to assess the effectiveness of LIVES and ARCHES interventions including empathetic listening and care, safety planning and referrals to other specialised services. The outcomes of experience of IPV, RC and modern contraceptive use (for FP cohort) were measured pre-intervention (baseline) and 9 months post-intervention for participants in 20 intervention clinics compared with participants in 20 comparison clinics. Multilevel models with a random intercept for health-facility and adjusted for individual level variables were used to estimate the intervention effect (time × intervention) on the outcomes.
results1617 clients were enrolled in the study. Comparing the intervention participants to the comparison participants, between baseline and endline, there was a relative decrease in exposure to IPV (beta=0.54 (95% CI 0.30 to 0.98)) and RC (beta=0.51(95% CI 0.28 to 0.94)) in the last 6 months. There was no difference in the modern contraceptive use comparing FP cohort participants at intervention clinics to comparison participants over time.
conclusionIntegration of IPV and RC screening and first-line response in FP and ANC services can reduce risk of violence in women not already experiencing it as well as reduce risk of reoccurrence. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT05331508.
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.