IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/camsys/v12y2016i1p1-202.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Advocacy Interventions to Reduce or Eliminate Violence and Promote the Physical and Psychosocial Well‐Being of Women who Experience Intimate Partner Abuse: A Systematic Review

Author

Listed:
  • Carol Rivas
  • Jean Ramsay
  • Laura Sadowski
  • Leslie L Davidson
  • Danielle Dunnes
  • Sandra Eldridge
  • Kelsey Hegarty
  • Angela Taft
  • Gene Feder

Abstract

This Campbell systematic review assesses the effects of advocacy interventions on intimate partner violence and women's wellbeing. The review summarizes findings from 13 studies. Physical abuse: After one year, brief advocacy had no effect in two healthcare studies and one community study, but it reduced minor abuse in one antenatal care study. Another antenatal study showed reduced abuse immediately after brief advocacy, but women were also treated for depression, which may have affected results. Two studies provided weak evidence that intensive advocacy reduces physical abuse up to two years after the intervention. Sexual abuse was reported in four studies that found no effects. Emotional abuse: One antenatal care study reported reduced emotional abuse at 12 months after advocacy. Depression: Brief advocacy prevented depression in abused women attending healthcare services and pregnant women immediately after advocacy. Intensive advocacy did not reduce depression in shelter women followed up at 12 and 24 months. The moderate‐to‐low quality evidence came mostly from studies with a low risk of bias. Quality of life: Three trials of brief advocacy trials no benefit on quality of life. Intensive advocacy showed a weak benefit in two studies in domestic violence shelters/refuges, and a primary care study showed improved motivation to do daily tasks immediately after advocacy. Abstract BACKGROUND Intimate partner abuse is common worldwide, damaging the short‐ and long‐term physical, mental, and emotional health of survivors and children. Advocacy may contribute to reducing abuse, empowering women to improve their situation by providing informal counselling and support for safety planning and increasing access to different services. Advocacy may be a stand‐alone service, accepting referrals from healthcare providers, or part of a multi‐component (and possibly multi‐agency) intervention provided by service staff or others. OBJECTIVES To assess the effects of advocacy interventions within or outside healthcare settings in women who have experienced intimate partner abuse. SEARCH METHODS In April 2015, we searched CENTRAL, Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE, and 10 other databases. We also searched WHO ICTRP, mRCT, and UK Clinical Research Network (UKCRN), and examined relevant websites and reference lists with forward citation tracking of included studies. For the original review we handsearched six key journals. We also contacted first authors of eligible papers and experts in the field. SELECTION CRITERIA Randomised or quasi‐randomised controlled trials comparing advocacy interventions for women with experience of intimate partner abuse versus no intervention or usual care (if advocacy was minimal and fewer than 20% of women received it). DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Two review authors independently assessed risk of bias and undertook data extraction. We contacted authors for missing information needed to calculate statistics for the review and looked for adverse events. MAIN RESULTS We included 13 trials involving 2141 participants aged 15 to 65 years, frequently having low socioeconomic status. The studies were quite heterogeneous in terms of methodology, study processes and design, including with regard to the duration of follow‐up (postintervention to three years), although this was not associated with differences in effect. The studies also had considerable clinical heterogeneity in relation to staff delivering advocacy; setting (community, shelter, antenatal, healthcare); advocacy intensity (from 30 minutes to 80 hours); and abuse severity. Three trials evaluated advocacy within multi‐component interventions. Eleven measured some form of abuse (eight scales), six assessed quality of life (three scales), and six measured depression (three scales). Countries and ethnic groups varied (one or more minority ethnic groups in the USA or UK, and local populations in Hong Kong and Peru). Setting was associated with intensity and duration of advocacy. Risk of bias was high in five studies, moderate in five, and low in three. The quality of evidence (considering multiple factors such as risk of bias, study size, missing data) was moderate to low for brief advocacy and very low for intensive advocacy. Incidence of abuse Physical abuse Moderate quality pooled data from two healthcare studies (moderate risk of bias) and one community study (low risk of bias), all with 12‐month follow‐up data, showed no effect on physical abuse for brief (

Suggested Citation

  • Carol Rivas & Jean Ramsay & Laura Sadowski & Leslie L Davidson & Danielle Dunnes & Sandra Eldridge & Kelsey Hegarty & Angela Taft & Gene Feder, 2016. "Advocacy Interventions to Reduce or Eliminate Violence and Promote the Physical and Psychosocial Well‐Being of Women who Experience Intimate Partner Abuse: A Systematic Review," Campbell Systematic Reviews, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 12(1), pages 1-202.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:camsys:v:12:y:2016:i:1:p:1-202
    DOI: 10.4073/csr.2016.2
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.4073/csr.2016.2
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.4073/csr.2016.2?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. World Bank, 2006. "World Development Report 2007," World Bank Publications - Books, The World Bank Group, number 5989.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Luis Enrique Espinoza & Lucas Enrique Espinoza & Jennifer L. Talleff & Rosalva Resendiz & Leticia Nevarez Zavala & Kathleen Ayako Anangwe, 2022. "A comparative study of intimate partner violence among U.S.‐born and foreign‐born Hispanic women," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 103(4), pages 833-844, July.
    2. Danielle R. Shayani & Sara B. Danitz & Stephanie K. Low & Alison B. Hamilton & Katherine M. Iverson, 2022. "Women Tell All: A Comparative Thematic Analysis of Women’s Perspectives on Two Brief Counseling Interventions for Intimate Partner Violence," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(5), pages 1-19, February.
    3. Kevin Petersen & Robert C. Davis & David Weisburd & Bruce Taylor, 2022. "Effects of second responder programs on repeat incidents of family abuse: An updated systematic review and meta‐analysis," Campbell Systematic Reviews, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 18(1), March.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Pranab Bardhan, 2006. "Awakening Giants, Feet of Clay," Journal of South Asian Development, , vol. 1(1), pages 1-17, April.
    2. Ralph Hippe & Luisa De Sousa Lobo Borges de Araujo & Patricia Dinis Mota da Costa, 2016. "Equity in Education in Europe," JRC Research Reports JRC104595, Joint Research Centre.
    3. Rory Horner & David Hulme, 2019. "From International to Global Development: New Geographies of 21st Century Development," Development and Change, International Institute of Social Studies, vol. 50(2), pages 347-378, March.
    4. Santra, Swarup, 2014. "Is Human Development Index (HDI) a reflector of quality of air? a comparative study on developed and developing countries," MPRA Paper 53522, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    5. Marc Fleurbaey & Vito Peragine, 2013. "Ex Ante Versus Ex Post Equality of Opportunity," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 80(317), pages 118-130, January.
    6. World Bank, "undated". "Social Gains in the Balance : A Fiscal Policy Challenge for Latin America and the Caribbean [Ganancias sociales en la balanza : un desafio de la politica fiscal para América Latina y el Caribe]," World Bank Publications - Reports 17198, The World Bank Group.
    7. Castilho, Marta & Menéndez, Marta & Sztulman, Aude, 2012. "Trade Liberalization, Inequality, and Poverty in Brazilian States," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 40(4), pages 821-835.
    8. Collier, Paul & Dercon, Stefan, 2006. "Review Article: The Complementarities of Poverty Reduction, Equity, and Growth: A Perspective on the World Development Report 2006," Economic Development and Cultural Change, University of Chicago Press, vol. 55(1), pages 223-236, October.
    9. Hiller, Victor & Touré, Nouhoum, 2021. "Endogenous gender power: The two facets of empowerment," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 149(C).
    10. Jean-François Bourg & Jean-Jacques Gouguet, 2010. "The Political Economy of Professional Sport," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 13177.
    11. León, Gianmarco & Chong, Alberto E., 2007. "Privatized Firms, Rule of Law and Labor Outcomes in Emerging Markets," IDB Publications (Working Papers) 1957, Inter-American Development Bank.
    12. Sharma Shalendra D., 2008. "The Many Faces of Today's Globalization: A Survey of Recent Literature," New Global Studies, De Gruyter, vol. 2(2), pages 1-29, June.
    13. Fosu, Augustin Kwasi, 2017. "Growth, inequality, and poverty reduction in developing countries: Recent global evidence," Research in Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(2), pages 306-336.
    14. Jan Vandemoortele, 2012. "Equity Begins with Children," Working papers 1201, UNICEF,Division of Policy and Strategy.
    15. Alessandro Maffioli & Diego Ubfal & Gonzalo Vazquez-Bare & Pedro Cerdan-Infantes, 2013. "Improving technology adoption in agriculture through extension services: evidence from Uruguay," Journal of Development Effectiveness, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 5(1), pages 64-81, March.
    16. Ioannis Glinavos, 2010. "Transition or development?," Progress in Development Studies, , vol. 10(1), pages 59-74, January.
    17. Anne Jerneck & Lennart Olsson, 2008. "Adaptation and the poor: development, resilience and transition," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 8(2), pages 170-182, March.
    18. Johan Graafland & Bjorn Lous, 2018. "Economic Freedom, Income Inequality and Life Satisfaction in OECD Countries," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 19(7), pages 2071-2093, October.
    19. Harinder Kohli & Ashok Sharma & Anil Sood (ed.), 2011. "Asia 2050: Realizing the Asian Century," Books, Emerging Markets Forum, edition 1, number asia2050, Summer.
    20. Drakopoulos, Stavros A. & Lakioti, E & Theodossiou, Ioannis, 2008. "The Effect of Childhood Economic Deprivation on Physical and Psychological health Status," MPRA Paper 10438, University Library of Munich, Germany.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:camsys:v:12:y:2016:i:1:p:1-202. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1891-1803 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.