CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 89Intimate Partner and Family ViolenceStalking, Cyberstalking, and HarassmentSexual Assault and Victimization Studies

Efficacy of a Web-Based Safety Decision Aid for Women Experiencing Intimate Partner Violence: Randomized Controlled Trial

Open access
Koziol-McLain, Jane, Vandal, Alain C, Wilson, Denise, Nada-Raja, Shyamala, Dobbs, Terry, McLean, Christine, Sisk, Rose, Eden, Karen B +1 more·2018·Journal of Medical Internet Research
DOI 10.2196/jmir.8617PMC PMC6858022
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Intimate partner violence (IPV) is a human rights violation and leading health burden for women. Safety planning is a hallmark of specialist family violence intervention, yet only a small proportion of women access formal services. A Web-based safety decision aid may reach a wide audience of women experiencing IPV and offer the opportunity to prioritize and plan for safety for themselves and their families. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to test the efficacy of a Web-based safety decision aid (isafe) for women experiencing IPV. METHODS: We conducted a fully automated Web-based two-arm parallel randomized controlled trial (RCT) in a general population of New Zealand women who had experienced IPV in the past 6 months. Computer-generated randomization was based on a minimization scheme with stratification by severity of violence and children. Women were randomly assigned to the password-protected intervention website (safety priority setting, danger assessment, and tailored action plan components) or control website (standard, nonindividualized information). Primary endpoints were self-reported mental health (Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale-Revised, CESD-R) and IPV exposure (Severity of Violence Against Women Scale, SVAWS) at 12-month follow-up. Analyses were by intention to treat. RESULTS: Women were recruited from September 2012 to September 2014. Participants were aged between 16 and 60 years, 27% (111/412) self-identified as Māori (indigenous New Zealand), and 51% (210/412) reported at baseline that they were unsure of their future plans for their partner relationship. Among the 412 women recruited, retention at 12 months was 87%. The adjusted estimated intervention effect for SVAWS was -12.44 (95% CI -23.35 to -1.54) for Māori and 0.76 (95% CI -5.57 to 7.09) for non-Māori. The adjusted intervention effect for CESD-R was -7.75 (95% CI -15.57 to 0.07) for Māori and 1.36 (-3.16 to 5.88) for non-Māori. No study-related adverse events were reported. CONCLUSIONS: The interactive, individualized Web-based isafe decision aid was effective in reducing IPV exposure limited to indigenous Māori women. Discovery of a treatment effect in a population group that experiences significant health disparities is a welcome, important finding. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR): ACTRN12612000708853; https://www.anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?ACTRN=12612000708853 (Archived by Webcite at http://www.webcitation/61MGuVXdK).

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2196/jmir.8617

Cites

51 of 51 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • In trials completed in the US (IRIS), NZ (I-SAFE) and Australia (I-DECIDE), women in both study arms improved over time on most primary and secondary outcomes.

    “In trials completed in the US (IRIS) [37], NZ (I-SAFE) [38] and Australia (I-DECIDE) [39], women in both study arms (tailored online intervention, general information) improved over time on most primary and secondary outcomes.”

    From Longitudinal impacts of an online safety and health intervention for women experiencing intimate partner violence: randomized controlled trial (2020) · cites this paper as [38]

    For the cited NZ I-SAFE trial, Results > Baseline Characteristics and Results > Outcomes show lower violence and depression scores at follow-up in both arms, consistent with improvement on the primary outcomes. The paper does not establish that both arms improved on most secondary outcomes: it reports that between-arm estimates for those outcomes were not significant, which is a different finding. The US and Australian trials have separate citations in the citing sentence and are not judged here. (LLM, conf=0.83)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Maori women have increased risk of violence compared to the NZ population of women, and face considerable barriers to obtaining support.

    “an important finding given Maori women’s increased risk of violence compared to the NZ population of women, and the considerable barriers they face to obtaining support [38].”

    From Longitudinal impacts of an online safety and health intervention for women experiencing intimate partner violence: randomized controlled trial (2020) · cites this paper as [38]

    The Discussion describes substantial barriers to support for Māori women, including discrimination, cost, and fear of judgment. Results > Participants reports that Māori women were 27% of this IPV-study sample but 12% of New Zealand women aged 15 or older. That overrepresentation is consistent with increased risk, but a recruited trial sample does not establish a population-wide risk comparison. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Maori women were more likely to benefit from the tailored intervention in terms of reductions in both depression and severity of violence.

    “Specifically, Maori women were more likely to benefit from the tailored intervention in terms of reductions in both depression and severity of violence (primary outcomes)”

    From Longitudinal impacts of an online safety and health intervention for women experiencing intimate partner violence: randomized controlled trial (2020) · cites this paper as [38]

  • The lack of differences by study arm is consistent with the overall pattern of results found in 3 completed trials that also tested versions of a tailored intervention with the same core components, modified to fit different countries and contexts, against a non-tailored intervention [25, 37-39].

    “The lack of differences by study arm is consistent with the overall pattern of results found in 3 completed trials that also tested versions of a tailored intervention with the same core components, modified to fit different countries and contexts, against a non-tailored intervention [25, 37–39].”

    From Longitudinal impacts of an online safety and health intervention for women experiencing intimate partner violence: randomized controlled trial (2020) · cites this paper as [38]

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. [18]Eaton WW Smith C Ybarra M Muntaner C Tien A Maruish ME Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale: review and revision (CESD and CESD-R) The Use Of Psychological Testing For Treatment Planning And Outcomes third Edition, Volume 3 2004 Mahwah Lawrence Erlbaum Associates
  2. [57]Family Violence Death Review Committee Fifth Report Data: January 2009 to December 2015 2017 Wellington Health Quality & Safety Commission

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Koziol-McLain, J., Vandal, A. C., Wilson, D., Nada-Raja, S., Dobbs, T., McLean, C., Sisk, R., Eden, K. B., & Glass, N. E.
Affiliations
  • Auckland University of Technology (NZ)
  • Oregon Health & Science University (US)
  • Johns Hopkins University (US)
ORCID
Venue
Journal of Medical Internet Research
Publisher
JMIR Publications Inc.
Published
2018-01-10
Volume
19
Issue
12
Pages
e426
ISSN
1438-8871 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.2196/jmir.8617
PMC
PMC6858022
OpenAlex
W2783643592
Cited by
89
References
51
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 16 · 2022: 17 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 13 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 3
FWCI
9.64
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • Journal of Medical Internet Research (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research Explorer (The University of Manchester) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • Tuwhera (Auckland University of Technology) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • ResearchSpace (University of Auckland) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Health › Intimate Partner and Family Violence
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Stalking, Cyberstalking, and Harassment
  • Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Sexual Assault and Victimization Studies
Keywords
intimate partner violence, safety planning, web-based decision aid, women's mental health, depression, Māori women, Indigenous health disparities, family violence intervention, hazard assessment, action planning, treatment retention, New Zealand women, online health interventions
MeSH terms
Intimate Partner Violence, Adolescent, Adult, Australia, Decision Support Techniques, Female, Humans, Mental Health, Middle Aged, New Zealand, Sexual Partners, Domestic Violence, Internet, Young Adult

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