How Valid is the Question of Fear of a Partner in Identifying Intimate Partner Abuse? A Cross-Sectional Analysis of Four Studies

2020 ◽  
pp. 088626052093443
Author(s):  
Marcos Signorelli ◽  
Angela Taft ◽  
Deirdre Gartland ◽  
Leesa Hooker ◽  
Christine McKee ◽  
...  

Intimate partner abuse (IPA) affects women’s health, requiring accurate questions to identify the abuse. We investigated the accuracy of three questions about fear of an intimate partner in identifying exposure to IPA. We compared the sensitivity and specificity of these questions with the Composite Abuse Scale (CAS) using secondary data analysis of four existing studies. All studies recruited adult women from clinical settings, with sample sizes ranging from 1,257 to 5,871. We examined associations between demographic factors and fear through multivariate logistic regression, and analysis of the sensitivity and specificity of the questions about fear and IPA (CAS), generating a receiver operating curve (ROC). The prevalence of lifetime fear of a partner ranged from 9.5% to 26.7%; 14.0% of women reported fear in the past 12 months; and current fear ranged from 1.3% to 3.3%. Comparing the three questions, the question “afraid of a partner in the past 12 months” was considered the best question to identify IPA. This question had the greatest area under the ROC (0.80, 95% confidence interval (CI) = [0.78–0.81]) compared with “are you currently afraid” (range 0.57–0.61) or “have you ever been afraid” (range 0.66–0.77); and demonstrated better sensitivity (64.8%) and specificity (94.8%). Demographic factors associated with “fear of a partner in the past 12 months” included being divorced/separated (odds ratio [OR] = 8.49, 95% CI = [6.70–10.76]); having a low income (OR = 4.21, 95% CI = [3.46–5.13]); and having less than 12 years of education (OR = 2.48, 95% CI = [2.04–3.02]). The question “In the last 12 months did you ever feel frightened by what your partner says or does?” has potential to identify a majority of women experiencing IPA, supporting its utilization where more comprehensive measures are not possible.

2010 ◽  
Vol 25 (4) ◽  
pp. 536-552 ◽  
Author(s):  
Melissa St. Pierre ◽  
Charlene Y. Senn

While understanding of intimate partner abuse (IPA) in gay and lesbian relationships has increased within the past decade, there remain several gaps in the help-seeking research. In particular, research examining the external barriers to help-seeking encountered by gay and lesbian victims of IPA has been largely atheoretical. To address this gap, an application of The Barriers Model was undertaken. This mixed-methods study surveyed 280 gay, lesbian, and/or queer participants living in Canada. Findings revealed that victims encountered external barriers in the environment (i.e., Layer 1 of the model), such as lack of availability of gay and lesbian specific services. Results also suggested that barriers due to family/socialization/role expectations (i.e., Layer 2 of the model), such as concealment of sexual orientation, had an impact on help-seeking.


2017 ◽  
Vol 26 (12) ◽  
pp. 3297-3306 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vivian Yawei Guo ◽  
Esther Yee Tak Yu ◽  
Rosa Sze Man Wong ◽  
Patrick Ip ◽  
Agnes Fung Yee Tiwari ◽  
...  

BMJ Open ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (11) ◽  
pp. e041339
Author(s):  
Laura Tarzia ◽  
Meghan A Bohren ◽  
Jacqui Cameron ◽  
Claudia Garcia-Moreno ◽  
Lorna O'Doherty ◽  
...  

ObjectiveTo identify and synthesise the experiences and expectations of women victim/survivors of intimate partner abuse (IPA) following disclosure to a healthcare provider (HCP).MethodsThe databases MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsychINFO, SocINDEX, ASSIA and the Cochrane Library were searched in February 2020. Included studies needed to focus on women’s experiences with and expectations of HCPs after disclosure of IPA. We considered primary studies using qualitative methods for both data collection and analysis published since 2004. Studies conducted in any country, in any type of healthcare setting, were included. The quality of individual studies was assessed using an adaptation of the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme checklist for qualitative studies. The confidence in the overall evidence base was determined using Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE)-Confidence in the Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative Research methods. Thematic synthesis was used for analysis.ResultsThirty-one papers describing 30 studies were included in the final review. These were conducted in a range of health settings, predominantly in the USA and other high-income countries. All studies were in English. Four main themes were developed through the analysis, describing women’s experiences and expectations of HCPs: (1) connection through kindness and care; (2) see the evil, hear the evil, speak the evil; (3) do more than just listen; and (4) plant the right seed. If these key expectations were absent from care, it resulted in a range of negative emotional impacts for women.ConclusionsOur findings strongly align with the principles of woman-centred care, indicating that women value emotional connection, practical support through action and advocacy and an approach that recognises their autonomy and is tailored to their individual needs. Drawing on the evidence, we have developed a best practice model to guide practitioners in how to deliver woman-centred care. This review has critical implications for practice, highlighting the simplicity of what HCPs can do to support women experiencing IPA, although its applicability to low-income and-middle income settings remains to be explored.


2016 ◽  
Vol 23 (13) ◽  
pp. 1638-1655 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ashlee J. Warnecke ◽  
Yvette Z. Szabo ◽  
Vicki E. Burns ◽  
Rafael Fernandez-Botran ◽  
James J. Miller ◽  
...  

This cross-sectional study compared the prevalence of formal and informal sheltering (i.e., staying in an agency shelter, or with friends/family, respectively) and evaluated associations with abuse severity. Community women ( N = 197) with divorce histories reported on lifetime intimate partner abuse, including sheltering for safety. Prevalence of informal sheltering (43%) exceeded that of formal sheltering (11%). Rates/levels of coercive control, severe violence, injury, and police involvement were comparable for women who sheltered formally or informally, and exceeded those of women who never sheltered. Sheltering histories can be identified in community samples of women with divorce histories. Informal sheltering is prevalent, and comparable to formal sheltering in terms of correlations with abuse severity.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document