Screening for Partner Violence: Direct Questioning or Self-Report?
OBJECTIVE: To compare the effectiveness of a self-report checklist with a standard set of direct questions in identifying women who are experiencing domestic partner violence.
METHODS: Medical records were reviewed for evidence of positive partner violence for women attending the Royal Brisbane and Women’s Hospital prenatal clinic between August and September 2002.
RESULTS: Records (n = 1,596) were audited, and 937 (58.7%) contained both forms. The self-report check list identified a greater number of "cases" of partner violence (151) than the direct questions (66), with the level of agreement between the two instruments being only "fair" (Kappa coefficient .34). Each of the methods identified 7 cases of major abuse, which would have been missed if only 1 instrument had been used. All cases where women stated that they were afraid of their partner using the direct questions were also identified using the self-report checklist.
CONCLUSION: A self-report checklist is an effective alternative to direct questioning in detecting women who are experiencing partner violence and is acceptable to women.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: II-3
Citation countsare sourced monthly fromand citation databases.
These databases contain citations from different subsets of available publications and different time periods and thus the citation count from each is usually different. Some works are not in either database and no count is displayed. Scopus includes citations from articles published in 1996 onwards, and Web of Science generally from 1980 onwards.
Citations counts from theindexing service can be viewed at the linked Google Scholar™ search.
|Item Type:||Journal Article|
|Additional Information:||Self-archiving of the author-version is not yet supported by this publisher. For more information, please refer to the journal's website (see link) or contact the author. Author contact details: firstname.lastname@example.org|
|Keywords:||Midwifery, violence, pregnancy, domestic violence, midwife|
|Subjects:||Australian and New Zealand Standard Research Classification > MEDICAL AND HEALTH SCIENCES (110000) > NURSING (111000) > Midwifery (111006)|
Australian and New Zealand Standard Research Classification > MEDICAL AND HEALTH SCIENCES (110000) > NURSING (111000)
|Divisions:||Current > QUT Faculties and Divisions > Faculty of Health|
Current > Institutes > Institute of Health and Biomedical Innovation
|Copyright Owner:||Copyright 2004 Lippincott Williams & Wilkins|
|Deposited On:||04 Apr 2006|
|Last Modified:||29 Feb 2012 23:10|
Repository Staff Only: item control page