Dataset Information

High sensitivity and specificity screening for clinically significant intimate partner violence.

ABSTRACT: The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force has recommended that clinicians screen patients for intimate partner violence (IPV). This article aims to develop and test the first screeners for clinically significant physical and psychological IPV (i.e., acts meeting criteria in the International Classification of Diseases (11th ed.; ICD-11; World Health Organization, 2019) and the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (5th ed.; DSM-5; American Psychiatric Association, 2013). The goal was to derive screeners that (1) are maximally brief, while still achieving high sensitivity and specificity; (2) assess perpetration and victimization when either men or women are reporting; and (3) use ICD-11/DSM-5 criteria as the reference standard. Random samples of active duty service members at 82 installations worldwide were obtained via e-mail invitation (2006: N = 54,543; 2008: N = 48,909); their response rates were excellent for long general population surveys with no payment (2006: 44.7%, 2008: 49.0%). The population of spouses at the participating installation was invited by mailed postcard (2006: N = 19,722; 2008: N = 12,127; response rates-2006: 12.3%, 2008: 10.8%). Clinically significant physical intimate partner violence can be effectively screened with as few as four items, with sensitivities > 90% and specificities > 95%; clinically significant psychological intimate partner violence can be screened with two items. Men and women can be screened with equivalent accuracy, as can those committing the violence and those victimized by it. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

SUBMITTER: Heyman RE

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7906486 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND: Intimate partner violence (IPV) including physical, sexual and emotional violence, causes short and long term ill-health. Brief questions that reliably identify women experiencing IPV who present in clinical settings are a pre-requisite for an appropriate response from health services to this substantial public health problem. We estimated the sensitivity and specificity of four questions (HARK) developed from the Abuse Assessment screen, compared to a 30-item abuse questionnaire, the Composite Abuse Scale (CAS). METHODS: We administered the four HARK questions and the CAS to women approached by two researchers in general practice waiting rooms in Newham, east London. Inclusions: women aged more than 17 years waiting to see a doctor or nurse, who had been in an intimate relationship in the last year. EXCLUSIONS: women who were accompanied by children over four years of age or another adult, too unwell to complete the questionnaires, unable to understand English or unable to give informed consent. RESULTS: Two hundred and thirty two women were recruited. The response rate was 54%. The prevalence of current intimate partner violence, within the last 12 months, using the CAS cut off score of >or=3, was 23% (95% C.I. 17% to 28%) with pre-test odds of 0.3 (95% C.I. 0.2 to 0.4). The receiver operator characteristic curve demonstrated that a HARK cut off score of >or=1 maximises the true positives whilst minimising the false positives. The sensitivity of the optimal HARK cut-off score of >or=1 was 81% (95% C.I. 69% to 90%), specificity 95% (95% C.I. 91% to 98%), positive predictive value 83% (95% C.I. 70% to 91%), negative predictive value 94% (95% C.I. 90% to 97%), likelihood ratio 16 (95% C.I. 8 to 31) and post-test odds 5. CONCLUSION: The four HARK questions accurately identify women experiencing IPV in the past year and may help women disclose abuse in general practice. The HARK questions could be incorporated into the electronic medical record in primary care to prompt clinicians to ask about recent partner violence and to encourage disclosure by patients. Future research should test the effectiveness of HARK in clinical consultations.

Project description:IntroductionBetween 38 and 59 percent of women presenting to health care professionals have experienced intimate partner violence. Consequently, multiple intimate partner violence identification or screening programs within health care settings have been developed; however, substantial variations in program content and interpretation of program effectiveness has resulted in conflicting practice guidelines. The purpose of our scoping review is to broadly identify and synthesize the available literature evaluating intimate partner violence identification programs within health care settings to identify key areas for potential evidence-based recommendations and to focus research priorities in the field.Materials and methodsWe conducted a search of MEDLINE, Embase, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and psycINFO. We used broad eligibility criteria to identify studies that evaluated intimate partner violence identification programs in health care settings. We completed all screening and data extraction independently and in duplicate. We used descriptive statistics to summarize all data.ResultsWe identified 59 eligible studies evaluating intimate partner violence identification programs within health care settings. The most commonly reported outcome themes were IPV disclosure (69%, n = 35), number of patients screened (39%, n = 20), HCP opinions towards screening (37%, n = 19), and patient opinions towards screening (29%, n = 15). The majority of studies (36 studies (70.6%)) reported positive program evaluation results.DiscussionThe majority of studies reported positive program evaluation results. This may suggest that many different intimate partner violence identification programs are beneficial for identifying victims of abuse, however, it remains unknown as to whether identification programs prevent future episodes of abuse. Additionally, the substantial heterogeneity of the intervention characteristics, study methodology, and outcome measures assessed limits the ability to make clear recommendations as to the optimal method(s) of screening.

Project description:Recent systematic reviews have noted a lack of evidence that screening for intimate partner violence does more good than harm. We assess whether patients screened for intimate partner violence on a computer kiosk in the emergency department (ED) experienced any adverse events during or subsequent to the ED visit and whether computer kiosk identification and referral of intimate partner violence in the ED setting resulted in safety behaviors or contact with referrals.We conducted a prospective, observational study in which a convenience sample of male and female ED patients triaged to the waiting room who screened positive (on a computer kiosk-based questionnaire) for intimate partner violence in the past year were provided with resources and information and invited to participate in a series of follow-up interviews. At 1-week and 3-month follow-up visits, we assessed intimate partner violence, safety issues, and use of resources. In addition, to obtain an objective measure of safety, we assessed the number of violence-related 911 calls to participant addresses within a call district 6 months before and 6 months after the index ED visit.Of the 2,134 participants in a relationship in the last year, 548 (25.7%) screened positive for intimate partner violence. No safety issues, such as calling security or a partner's interference with the screening, occurred during the ED visit for any patient who disclosed intimate partner violence. Of the 216 intimate partner violence victims interviewed in person and 65 contacted by telephone 1 week later, no intimate partner violence victims reported any injuries or increased intimate partner violence resulting from participating in the study. For the sample in the local police district, there was no increase in the number of intimate partner violence victims who called 911 in the 6 months after the ED visit. Finally, 35% (n=131) reported they had contacted community resources during the 3-month follow-up period.Among patients screening positive for intimate partner violence, there were no identified adverse events related to screening, and many had contacted community resources.

Project description:BACKGROUND: Intervention studies for depression and intimate partner violence (IPV) commonly incorporate screening to identify eligible participants. The challenge is that current ethical evaluation is largely informed by the four principle approach applying principles of beneficence, non-maleficence, and respect for justice and autonomy. We examine three intervention studies for IPV, postnatal depression (PND) and depression that used screening from the perspective of principlism, followed by the perspective of a narrative and relational approach. We suggest that a narrative and relational approach to ethics brings to light concerns that principlism can overlook. DISCUSSION: The justification most commonly used to incorporate screening is that the potential benefits of identifying intervention efficacy balance the risk of individual harm. However, considerable risks do exist. The discovery of new information may result in further depression or worries, people might feel burdened, open to further risk, unsure of whether to disclose information to family members and disappointed if they are allocated to a control group. This raises questions about study design and whether the principle of equipoise remains an adequate justification in studies with vulnerable groups. In addition, autonomy is said to be respected because participants give informed consent to participate. However, the context of where recruitment is undertaken has been shown to influence how people make decisions. SUMMARY: The four principles have been subjected to criticisms in recent years but they remain prominent in public health and medical research. We provide a set of simple, interrogative questions that are narrative and relationally driven which may assist to further evaluate the potential impacts of using screening to identify eligible research participants in intervention studies. A narrative and relational based approach requires seeing people as situated within their social and cultural contexts, and as existing within relationships that are likely to be affected by the results of screening information.

Dataset Information

High sensitivity and specificity screening for clinically significant intimate partner violence.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets