Skip to content

Effectiveness of an intimate partner violence intervention to reduce detection gaps among diverse ethnic groups of women

Effectiveness of an intimate partner violence intervention to reduce detection gaps among diverse ethnic groups of women: A quasi-experiment in MCH clinics

Status
Active, not recruiting
Phases
Unknown
Study type
Interventional
Source
ISRCTN
Registry ID
ISRCTN17465883
Enrollment
3829
Registered
2025-10-26
Start date
2022-06-07
Completion date
Unknown
Last updated
2025-11-03

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Intimate partner violence (IPV) Other

Interventions

Lasting 6 months (January to May 2022), the intervention included three activities: a 2-day nurses’ training program (20 nurses) in the intervention MCH clinics, plus 1 day of practicum. The BGU resea

Sponsors

Ben-Gurion University of the Negev
Lead Sponsor

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
Female

Inclusion criteria

Inclusion criteria: 1. All women visiting selected MCH clinics (5 intervention, 5 control) during the study period 2. Women who attended for pregnancy follow-up or postpartum monitoring 3. The AAS section of the intervention (intervention clinics only) included women who can read, speak, and write Arabic and/or Hebrew, and women who signed a consent form to participate in the intervention clinics and fill out the AAS tool

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion criteria: 1. Women who were previously detected as IPV victims and were receiving relevant support services 2. Women who were assessed for IPV in the last 6 months 3. For the AAS arm of the intervention, women who refused to participate in the study and who did not agree to sign the consent form (intervention clinics)

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frame
Detection of IPV using the routine Ministry of Health (MoH) IPV screening question at pre-intervention (June–December 2021) in both intervention and control clinics. At post-intervention (June–December 2022), in the intervention clinics, IPV was measured using an adapted version of the Abuse Assessment Screening (AAS) for the first 350 women visiting the clinics, and for the rest of women routine questions were used. In the control clinics, IPV continued to be measured using the routine screening question of the MoH. This was explained in the manuscript in the data collection section.

Secondary

MeasureTime frame
Referral to support services data, based on documentations in women’s registry files and extracted retrospectively from the electronic records at baseline (June–December 2021) and at 6-month follow-up (June–December 2022). Referral to support services was defined as a documented referral recorded by the nurses in the MoH electronic records for women identified/suspected of experiencing IPV. In case of identification/suspicion, several steps were taken and documented in each woman registry file: 1. Condemn the violence and express support and empathy toward the woman. 2. Provide information about available support services and women’s rights. 3. Conduct an immediate risk assessment: in cases of immediate risk and with the woman’s consent, they were obligated to contact the welfare office and, if necessary, the police. If the situation did not involve immediate risk, nurses were required to refer the woman to relevant support services and provide her with information. If children were at risk, nurses had to report the case immediately to the welfare services and/or police. In addition, nurses were instructed to conduct follow-up conversations and monitor the case over time (every 3 months), and in case of no reports on IPV, they will stop. In case of IPV they will follow with the above referral protocol.

Countries

Israel

Contacts

Public ContactNihaya Daoud
daoud@bgu.ac.il+(972)86477531

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ISRCTN (via WHO ICTRP) · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026