A Comparison of the Types of Screening Tool Administration Methods Used for the Detection of Intimate Partner Violence
Journal Articles
Overview
Research
Identity
Additional Document Info
View All
Overview
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.
