ArticleFrontiers in sociology2025
Victim help-seeking patterns and how they can inform future support services for victims of intimate partner violence.
Article in Frontiers in sociology, 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.
- Invisible harm and constrained response: a conceptual analysis of psychological domestic abuse against disabled people in China.Frontiers in psychology · 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This research paper examines help-seeking behaviours of victims of intimate partner violence (IPV) in Germany by investigating the point at which victims tend to seek help in an abusive relationship and the types of services they most frequently seek support from. It is then considered how victims' gender, age and number of children affect the type of support sought, as well as the impact that seeking support from different forms of services has upon the duration of abuse suffered. This paper utilises data collected from a nationally representative online survey conducted in Germany, which included 420 victims of domestic abuse. Initially, the frequency with which victims seek help from different forms of formal and informal support networks is evaluated (henceforth referred to as intervention). Statistical tests are then applied to examine how victims' backgrounds, help-seeking behaviours, and the length of their abusive relationships influenced their choice of certain interventions. Ultimately, we found that the intervention relied on differed by gender, with women being more likely to seek informal support and male victims confiding more frequently in health practitioners. Victims who sought help from friends and family earlier were more likely to experience shorter abusive relationships. By contrast, victims that sought help from professional services were more likely to report longer relationships. The differences in help-seeking patterns suggest that victims have different needs and/or support networks available to them at different stages in abusive relationships. Challenges in leaving the relationship also reduced the likelihood of victims seeking support, with older victims the least likely to seek support from anyone and the number of victims 'children increasing the time taken to confide in anyone. These findings indicate the importance of victims' informal support networks being able to provide a supportive and understanding response when first approached for help by victims. This can be achieved through increasing social awareness of IPV and its consequences. Further qualitative research is required to identify victims' reasons for reaching out to different services across abusive relationships, to understand the needs that victims need met at different points of the abusive relationship.
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.