McMaster University

McMaster University

Types of Screening Tool Administration Methods detecting IPV

MacOrtho is pleased to announce the most recent publication in Trauma, Violence & Abuse. This publication is entitled, “ A Comparison of the Types of Screening Tool Administration Methods Used for the Detection of Intimate Partner Violence: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis."

Hussain N, Sprague S, Madden K, Hussain FN, Pindiprolu B, Bhandari M. A Comparison of the Types of Screening Tool Administration Methods Used for the Detection of Intimate Partner Violence: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Trauma Violence Abuse. 2013 Dec 15. [Epub ahead of print]

Abstract

Intimate partner violence (IPV) is associated with significant health consequences for victims, including acute/chronic pain, depression, trauma, suicide, death, as well as physical, emotional, and mental harms for families and children. The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to assess the rate of IPV disclosure in adult women (>18 years of age) with the use of three different screening tool administration methods: computer-assisted self-administered screen, self-administered written screen, and face-to-face interview screen. A comprehensive literature search was conducted in the MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effectiveness, and the Cochrane library databases. We identified 746 potentially relevant articles; however, only 6 were randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and included for analysis. No significant differences were observed when women were screened in face-to-face interviews or with a self-administered written screen (Odds of disclosing: 1.02, 95% confidence interval [CI]: [0.77, 1.35]); however, a computer-assisted self-administered screen was found to increase the odds of IPV disclosure by 37% in comparison to a face-to-face interview screen (odds ratio: 0.63, 95% CI: [0.31, 1.30]). Disclosure of IPV was also 23% higher for computer-assisted self-administered screen in comparison to self-administered written screen (Odds of disclosure: 1.23, 95% CI: [0.0.92, 1.64]). The results of this review suggest that computer-assisted self-administered screens leads to higher rates of IPV disclosure in comparison to both face-to-face interview and self-administered written screens.

Valid XHTML 1.0 Transitional Level Double-A conformance, W3C WAI Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0