Skip to main content

Table 2 How the IPV screening trial was cited (147 extractions from 112 sources)

From: Exploring the uptake and framing of research evidence on universal screening for intimate partner violence against women: a knowledge translation case study

Code/Sub-code

# sources given code (at least once) (% of 112)

# times code used for extraction (% of 147)

1. Major finding (Harm/Benefit): Used when IPV screening trial major finding cited:

61 (54.5)

80 (54.4)

 1.1 No harm from screening

13 (11.6)

14 (9.5)

 1.2 No benefit to screening

33 (29.5)

35 (23.8)

 1.3 Both (no harm/no benefit)

20 (17.9)

20 (13.6)

 1.4 Benefit to screening

8 (7.1)

8 (5.4)

 1.5 Results inconclusive

2 (1.8)

2 (1.4)

2. Methods/Measures/Statistics: Used when IPV screening trial method or measure cited:

19 (17)

21 (14.3)

 2.1 Women-centred outcomes

2 (1.8)

3 (2)

 2.2 Multi-level modelling

1 (.9)

1 (.7)

 2.3 Harms

3 (2.7)

3 (2)

 2.4 CAS cut-off

2 (1.8)

2 (1.4)

 2.5 WAST

2 (1.8)

3 (2)

 2.6 Other methods/measures/statistics

9 (8)

9 (6.1)

3. General screening/IPV reference: Used to cite IPV screening trial for general point about screening or IPV:

43 (38.4)

51 (34.7)

 3.1 Screening debate

15 (13.4)

16 (10.9)

 3.2 Importance of IPV/screening discussion

2 (1.8)

2 (1.4)

 3.3 HCP education/training

2 (1.8)

2 (1.4)

 3.4 Other

6 (5.4)

7 (4.8)

 3.5 Insufficient evidence to support screening

23 (20.5)

24 (16.3)

4. Interventions/Services: Used when IPV screening trial cited to show priority and/or research/knowledge gap in the area of interventions/services for IPV

13 (11.6)

14 (9.5)

5. Minor findings: Used when a minor IPV screening trial finding cited:

22 (19.6)

31(21.1)

 5.1 Effect size

1 (.9)

1 (.7)

 5.2 Retention rate

8 (7.1)

8 (5.4)

 5.3 Women not talking to HCP

8 (7.1)

8 (5.4)

 5.3a Women talking to HCP

4 (3.6)

5 (3.4)

 5.4 Sensitivity

2 (1.8)

2 (1.4)

 5.5 Other minor finding

7 (6.3)

7 (4.8)

6. No specific citation: Used when IPV screening trial listed as a reference or a source for readers to consult (but nothing specific cited in text)

3 (2.7)

3 (2)

7. Incorrect: Used when IPV screening trial cited incorrectly (e.g., for a finding not actually reported)

2 (1.8)

3 (2)

8. Other: Used when no other code appropriate, especially when reason for citing IPV screening trial is unclear

2 (1.8)

2 (1.4)

  1. Note: Each extraction received a maximum of three distinct codes. Some sources were given more than one sub-code per category. IPV: Intimate partner violence; HCP: Health care provider; CAS: Composite Abuse Scale [48]; WAST: Woman Abuse Screening Tool [49].