Cited by 81Intimate Partner and Family ViolenceHomelessness and Social IssuesCollaborative and Sustainable Housing Initiatives

Housing Interventions for Intimate Partner Violence Survivors: A Systematic Review

Klein, L. B., Chesworth, Brittney R., Howland-Myers, Julia R., Rizo, Cynthia Fraga, Macy, Rebecca J.·2021·Trauma, Violence, & Abuse

Abstract

Intimate partner violence (IPV) survivors are much more likely to experience housing insecurity or homelessness than those who have not experienced IPV. However, little comprehensive research has evaluated the effectiveness of interventions used to address IPV survivors’ housing insecurity. To address this knowledge gap, our team conducted a systematic review guided by three questions: (a) What are current interventions for addressing IPV survivors’ housing needs? (b) What are the methodological strengths and limitations of the research evaluating those interventions? (c) How effective are the identified interventions? We identified potentially relevant peer-reviewed and gray literature using variations of predetermined search terms and four search methods. Twelve articles met inclusion criteria. Accordingly, this study showed that there is an overall dearth of research concerning interventions that address IPV survivors’ housing insecurity and needs. Shelter is the most commonly assessed and available housing intervention for IPV survivors, but only limited empirical evaluation is available of shelter effectiveness. In addition, findings indicate both traditional shelter services and innovative interventions (e.g., rapid rehousing, flexible funding) would benefit from rigorous evaluation including examining survivor and situation characteristics contributing to housing strategy effectiveness.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/1524838019836284

Cites

48 of 48 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.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Klein, L. B., Chesworth, B. R., Howland-Myers, J. R., Rizo, C. F., & Macy, R. J.
Affiliations
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (US)
Corresponding author
Klein, L. B.
Venue
Trauma, Violence, & Abuse
Published
2019-03-26
Volume
22
Issue
2
Pages
249-264
ISSN
  • 1524-8380 (ISSN-L)
  • 1552-8324
OpenAlex
W2922781121
Cited by
78
References
48
Citations by year
2026: 11 · 2025: 17 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 1
FWCI
1.65
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Trauma Violence & Abuse (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Mrs. Marilyn Jacobs Preyer and Mr. Rich Preyer
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Health › Intimate Partner and Family Violence
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Homelessness and Social Issues
  • Social Sciences › Urban Studies › Collaborative and Sustainable Housing Initiatives
Keywords
intimate partner violence, housing insecurity, homelessness, housing interventions, shelter services, rapid rehousing, flexible funding, intervention effectiveness, IPV survivors
MeSH terms
Intimate Partner Violence, Housing, Humans, Survivors

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