期刊
ANNALS OF MEDICINE
卷 46, 期 8, 页码 567-586出版社
TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.3109/07853890.2014.941918
关键词
Advocacy; cognitive behavioural therapy; intimate partner violence; meta-analysis; systematic review; women
资金
- Fondo de Investigaciones Sanitarias [RD12/0028/009]
- Instituto Carlos III-FEDER and INT [12/318]
Objective. To determine the efficacy of Advocacy and Cognitive Behavioural Therapy interventions (CBT) in reducing physical, psychological, sexual, or any intimate partner violence (IPV). Methods. A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted using randomized control trials (RCTs) published in MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Scopus, Cochrane, and Clinical trials. The occurrence of physical, psychological, sexual, and/or any IPV measured efficacy. Results. Twelve RCTs involving 2666 participants were included. Advocacy interventions resulted in significant reductions in physical (standardized mean difference (SMD) -0.13; 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.25, -0.00) and psychological (SMD -0.19; 95% CI -0.32, -0.05) but not in sexual (SMD -0.20; 95% CI -0.43, 0.02) or any IPV (SMD -0.32; 95% CI -0.69, 0.04). CBT interventions showed a significant reduction in physical (SMD -0.79; 95% CI -1.26, -0.33) and psychological (SMD -0.80; 95% CI -1.25, -0.36) but not sexual (SMD -0.35; 95% CI -1.73, 1.03) or any IPV (SMD 0.09; 95% CI -0.05, 0.23). Conclusions. Both advocacy and CBT interventions reduced physical and psychological IPV but not sexual or any IPV. Limitations include the low number of studies and the heterogeneity of interventions.
作者
我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。
推荐
暂无数据