Cited by 55Traumatic Brain Injury ResearchIntimate Partner and Family ViolenceChild Abuse and Trauma

Correlates of brain injuries in women subjected to intimate partner violence: Identifying the dangers and raising awareness

Valera, Eve M., Campbell, Jacquelyn, Gill, Jessica, Iverson, Katherine M.·2019·Journal of Aggression, Maltreatment & Trauma

Abstract

Awareness of the highly detrimental and long-term sequelae of brain injuries, and in particular repetitive mild traumatic brain injuries (mTBIs/concussions), has been rapidly growing. Specifically, there has been significant focus on repetitive mTBIs in male athletes and military personnel. Unfortunately, what is likely the largest group of repetitive mTBI sufferers, namely women who experience intimate partner violence (IPV), has received scant attention. Women experiencing IPV sustain both repetitive mTBIs at a high rate and also strangulation-related anoxic/hypoxic brain injuries. Due to biological, psychosocial and trauma-related differences between these women and the (mostly) men who have been studied to date, we cannot generalize what is learned from these studies to women suffering from IPV-related TBIs. Here we summarize some research aimed at understanding the occurrence and sequelae of IPV-related TBIs among various samples (i.e., women in shelters or primary care, from the community, veterans). These data show that IPV-related TBIs are highly prevalent, and associated with a range of negative cognitive and psychological outcomes as well as structural and functional brain connectivity. These associations could not be accounted for by potential confounds (e.g., abuse severity, psychiatric symptoms), making it clear that these negative health outcomes were not merely artifacts of being in an abusive relationship. We highlight gaps in research and provide recommendations for clinical practice. We present ideas for future research to elucidate the mechanisms underlying the associations noted above, in hopes of providing new insights into the links between TBIs and health risks in women who have experienced IPV.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/10926771.2019.1581864

Cites

60 of 60 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Valera, E. M., Campbell, J., Gill, J., & Iverson, K. M.
Affiliations
  • Harvard University (US)
  • Johns Hopkins University (US)
  • National Institutes of Health (US)
  • Boston University (US)
Corresponding author
Valera, Eve M.
Venue
Journal of Aggression, Maltreatment & Trauma
Published
2019-03-12
Volume
28
Issue
6
Pages
695-713
ISSN
  • 1092-6771 (ISSN-L)
  • 1545-083X
OpenAlex
W2921628533
Cited by
55
References
60
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 6
FWCI
4.38
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Journal of Aggression Maltreatment & Trauma (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Rappaport Scholarship (N/A)
  • Harvard Center of Excellence Award (N/A)
  • Presidential Early Career Award for Scientists and Engineers USA 14-275 (USA 14-275)
  • Department of Veterans Affairs Health Services Research and Development Services IIR-16-032 (USA 14-275)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Traumatic Brain Injury Research
  • Social Sciences › Health › Intimate Partner and Family Violence
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Child Abuse and Trauma
Keywords
intimate partner violence, repetitive mild traumatic brain injury, concussion, women, strangulation, anoxic brain injury, hypoxic brain injury, cognitive outcomes, psychological outcomes, brain connectivity, victims of domestic violence, veterans, abuse severity

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review