Accepted for/Published in: Journal of Medical Internet Research
Date Submitted: Jul 9, 2020
Open Peer Review Period: Jul 9, 2020 - Sep 3, 2020
Date Accepted: Sep 15, 2020
(closed for review but you can still tweet)
Warning: This is an author submission that is not peer-reviewed or edited. Preprints - unless they show as "accepted" - should not be relied on to guide clinical practice or health-related behavior and should not be reported in news media as established information.
Intimate Partner Violence and Electronic Health Interventions: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomised Trials
ABSTRACT
Background:
Intimate partner violence (IPV) is a major public health concern. Electronic health (eHealth) interventions may reduce exposure to violence and health-related consequences as the technology provides a safe and flexible space for the target population. However, the evidence is unclear.
Objective:
To examine the effect of eHealth interventions compared to standard care on reducing intimate partner violence, depression and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) among women exposed to intimate partner violence.
Methods:
We searched EMBASE, MEDLINE, CENTRAL, PsycInfo, Scopus, the Global Health Library, ClinicalTrials.gov, the International Clinical Trial Registry Platform for published and unpublished trials from inception up to April 2019. Trials with an eHealth intervention targeted women exposed to violence were included. We assessed risk of bias using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool. Trials that reported effect estimates on overall intimate partner violence, physical violence, sexual violence, psychological violence, depression and/or post-traumatic stress disorder were included in meta-analyses.
Results:
A total of fourteen trials were included in the review; eight published trials, three unpublished trials and three ongoing trials. Two out of the eight published trials were judged as overall low risk of bias trials. The trials reported a total of 23 different types of outcomes and seven of the trials had outcomes that were eligible for meta-analyses. Our pooled analyses found no effect of eHealth interventions on any of our pre-specified outcomes: overall IPV (SMD: -0.01; 95% CI: -0.11 to 0.08; I2=0%; five trials, 1668 women); physical violence (SMD: 0.01; 95% CI: -0.22 to 0.24; I2=58%; four trials, 1128 women); psychological violence (SMD: 0.07; 95% CI: -0.12 to 0.25; I2=40%; four trials, 1129 women); sexual violence (MD: 0.36; 95% CI: -0.18 to 0.91; I2=0%; two trials, 1029 women); depression (SMD: -0.13; 95% CI: -0.37 to 0.11; I2=78%; five trials, 1600 women); and PTSD (MD: -0.11; 95% CI: -1.04-0.82; I2=0%; five trials, 1267 women).
Conclusions:
There is no evidence from randomised trials of a beneficial effect of eHealth interventions on IPV. More high-quality trials are needed and we recommend harmonising outcome reporting in IPV trials by establishing core outcome sets. Clinical Trial: PROSPERO: CRD42019130124.
Citation
Request queued. Please wait while the file is being generated. It may take some time.
Copyright
© The authors. All rights reserved. This is a privileged document currently under peer-review/community review (or an accepted/rejected manuscript). Authors have provided JMIR Publications with an exclusive license to publish this preprint on it's website for review and ahead-of-print citation purposes only. While the final peer-reviewed paper may be licensed under a cc-by license on publication, at this stage authors and publisher expressively prohibit redistribution of this draft paper other than for review purposes.