ArticleBMC medical education2025
Addressing gaps in intimate partner violence training in nursing: a case-based pedagogical intervention.
Article in BMC medical education, 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.
- Midwifery students' attitudes toward violence against women by metaphor analysis: a qualitative study.Revista da Associacao Medica Brasileira (1992) · 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundIntimate partner violence (IPV) refers to violence (physical, sexual, economic or psychological) inflicted by a spouse or male partner and constitutes a global public health crisis. Health services are a critical entry point for identifying IPV cases. Nurses and healthcare providers must recognize IPV signs, as their role is pivotal in early detection and intervention. However, healthcare professionals and nursing students report a lack of knowledge and training to address it effectively; and adequate training on IPV is still not guaranteed on nursing programs, as often lack adequate training, leaving graduates ill equipped to assist IPV victims.
aimTo assess the effects of a Case Method educational intervention on nursing students’ IPV Preparedness, Knowledge and Attitudes.
methodsPre-post quasi-experimental design. The intervention was integrated into the nursing course “Ethics and Legislation” including two main components: (1) a theoretical session focused on identifying and responding to IPV based on a clinic guide, and (2) a practical session involving simulated patient scenarios, placing students in a situation of attending to a IPV victim. Participants completed pre- and post-intervention assessments using an adapted version of the PREMIS scale. Additionally, a post-intervention survey was administered to assess students’ knowledge and satisfaction with the activity and methodology.
resultsA total of 142 students (87% females; 91% under 25 years of age) participated in the intervention. They showed significant improvements in perceived Preparedness and Knowledge (p < 0.001). Attitudes toward IPV improved overall (p = 0.007), with particularly notable gains among female students (p = 0.015), where the ‘Alcohol and Drugs’ subscale was the only one with a significant increase again overall (p < 0.001) and among women (p < 0.001). No significant differences were found based on age, gender, or previous training. Most surveyed students (n = 81) would recommend the activity (79%), 57% favoured it over traditional lectures, and over 80% answered knowledge questions correctly.
conclusionThe Case Method proved effective in enhancing nursing students’ self-perceived Preparedness and Knowledge dimensions in relation to IPV. Moreover, it was well received, indicating that its inclusion in nursing curricula could better prepare future healthcare professionals to address IPV.
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.