ArticleBMC pregnancy and childbirth2026
Screening tools and programmes for intimate partner violence in antenatal and postpartum healthcare across Europe: a scoping review with quality assessment.
Article in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
backgroundIntimate partner violence (IPV) during pregnancy causes serious harm to both the mother and the child. The magnitude of the problem is likely underestimated due to the sensitive nature of the topic and lack of consensus on screening practices, including frequency, tools, and whether screening should be systematic or risk-based. This scoping review aimed to map existing screening tools and healthcare-based screening programmes for detecting IPV in European countries within antenatal and postpartum care.
methodsJoanna Briggs Institute methodology was used and reported following PRISMA-ScR guidelines. Seven databases (Embase, PsycINFO, SocINDEX, PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, and CINAHL) were searched up to June 2025 to identify screening tools used in European countries. A quality assessment was conducted. To identify current screening programmes within antenatal and postpartum healthcare systems, representatives from 46 European countries were consulted.
resultsTwenty-four studies were included, and methodological quality ranged from low to serious risk of bias. Thirteen screening tools for physical, emotional, and sexual IPV were identified. No tools for stalking or digital violence were found. Most studies were cross-sectional. Data were received from 22 of 46 European countries (48%) regarding screening programmes in antenatal or post-partum care: 17 countries have screening programmes, while five reported none. The Abuse Assessment Screen (AAS) and the Woman Abuse Screening Tool (WAST) were the tools most commonly used in both the literature and screening programmes. Most countries with screening program recommendations, recommended a universal screening approach.
conclusionScreening tools and practices for detecting IPV during antenatal and post-partum care vary substantially across Europe, highlighting a lack of evidence and consensus on screening tools for IPV within antenatal and postpartum care.
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.