ArticleFrontiers in psychology2026
Invisible harm and constrained response: a conceptual analysis of psychological domestic abuse against disabled people in China.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Psychological domestic abuse against disabled people is under-recognised at the intersection of violence prevention, public mental health, and disability policy. Here, invisible harm does not mean wholly unseen harm; it denotes cumulative abuse that remains difficult for victims, social networks, and institutions to identify or translate into action. Constrained response denotes the linked restrictions on recognition and disclosure, evidentiary translation, and safe exit. This conceptual analysis synthesises Chinese law and policy, official statistics, reported judicial and legal-aid cases, and interdisciplinary scholarship. It includes disabled people with long-term physical, sensory, intellectual, or psychosocial impairments and is gender-inclusive, while acknowledging that the available cases and evidence are predominantly about women. We argue that the central problem is structural misalignment: formally universal protection assumes independent recognition, communication, evidence production, mobility, and post-separation care. Real-world cases show how communication barriers, event-centred proof, conflicted guardianship, and unavailable replacement care interrupt the pathway. Structural alignment would make each stage usable through accessible disclosure, pattern-based and assisted evidence, and care-enabled protection, linked by accountable multi-agency coordination. Alignment is necessary for equal access to protection but is not a complete solution to domestic abuse, which also requires prevention, perpetrator accountability, and change in gendered and disability-related power relations. The framework offers a mechanism-based tool for evaluating responses in China and in other settings where care and protection depend heavily on families.
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.