Problem-solving therapy for pregnant women experiencing depressive symptoms and intimate partner violence: A randomised, controlled feasibility trial in rural Ethiopia.

category

rct

is Randomized Controlled Trial

true

basis

Independent statistician generated 3-arm 2: 1: 1 table; coordinator/research assistant retained tables and received calls after baseline. Enrollment in an arm closed at 25. Seventeen of 52 women misclassified as no IPV were instead allocated by linked trial’s 2-arm table, excluding their opportunity forPST-IPV; authors note possible nonrandom allocation from baseline imbalance.

sources

https://www.ebi.ac.uk/europepmc/webservices/rest/search?query=EXT_ID:37889918%20AND%20SRC:MED&format=json&resultType=core · https://api.crossref.org/works/10.1371%2Fjournal.pgph.0002054 · https://www.ebi.ac.uk/europepmc/webservices/rest/PMC10610520/fullTextXML

review Scope

full-text

scope

Paper

status

assessed

score

2

randomized Controlled Trial

true

peer Reviewed

true

blinding

not-confirmed

basis

Independent statistician generated 3-arm 2: 1: 1 table; coordinator/research assistant retained tables and received calls after baseline. Enrollment in an arm closed at 25. Seventeen of 52 women misclassified as no IPV were instead allocated by linked trial’s 2-arm table, excluding their opportunity forPST-IPV; authors note possible nonrandom allocation from baseline imbalance.

sources

https://www.ebi.ac.uk/europepmc/webservices/rest/search?query=EXT_ID:37889918%20AND%20SRC:MED&format=json&resultType=core · https://api.crossref.org/works/10.1371%2Fjournal.pgph.0002054 · https://www.ebi.ac.uk/europepmc/webservices/rest/PMC10610520/fullTextXML

review Scope

full-text

human Approval

false

display Crosses

2

masking Roles

participants

No participant masking procedure established; active sessions versus leaflet care differ.

providers

Explicitly unmasked; separate provider groups trained for each active intervention.

assessors

Independent collectors exchanged recruitment sites for follow-up and were masked, with unmasking incidents to be documented; no incident count reported.

analysts

Explicitly masked to allocation.

rating Scale

library-trust-factor/1-3

status

unassessed

score

Not recorded

evidence Type

Randomized controlled feasibility study with material allocation-protocol deviations

intervention

Four-session problem-solving therapy adapted with trauma/IPV-informed training, risk awareness and avoidance of victim blaming; sessions address participants’ chosen problems. Four sessions within 8 weeks; mean session durations approximately 32–51 minutes. 19/25 completed all 4; 5 attended none, 1 attended one.

comparator

Four-session standard PST (12 women) or enhanced usual care (15 women: well-being leaflet and local support information). All arms additional to routine antenatal care. Shared comparator structure with linked depression feasibility trial.

sample

Final 25 PST-IPV/12 standard PST/15 enhanced usual care. Only 35 entered intended three-arm allocation (25/5/5); 17 psychological/emotional-IPV women were wrongly routed to linked two-arm table. Follow-up 19/25, 8/12, 12/15.

measurement

Implementation feasibility; Acceptability and delivery fidelity; Depressive symptoms and IPV; Safety

timing

Recruitment 35 days; follow-up planned 9 weeks; Four-session intervention over 8 weeks; Planned 9 weeks; 12/39 assessments occurred early; During trial and births by data-collection end

trial Id

PACTR202002513482084

relationship Note

Explicit domestic/intimate-partner violence exposure in the studied population; psychological intervention is within Language scope. See limitation and quality fields; no population-wide clinical recommendation is implied.

measured Genes

None recorded

pathways

None recorded

source Access

level

full-text

source URLs

https://www.ebi.ac.uk/europepmc/webservices/rest/search?query=EXT_ID:37889918%20AND%20SRC:MED&format=json&resultType=core · https://api.crossref.org/works/10.1371%2Fjournal.pgph.0002054 · https://www.ebi.ac.uk/europepmc/webservices/rest/PMC10610520/fullTextXML

retrieved At

2026-10-30T08:21:40.085701+00:00

outcomes

1. name

   Implementation feasibility

   follow Up

   Recruitment 35 days; follow-up planned 9 weeks

   result

   52 eligiblewomen enrolled; 39/52 completed assessment; delivery feasible with changes required to randomization, provider skills and scheduling.

   effect Estimate

   Not recorded

   uncertainty

   Primary aim was feasibility, not powered comparative efficacy.

   primary Status

   primary

2. name

   Acceptability and delivery fidelity

   follow Up

   Four-session intervention over 8 weeks

   result

   19/25 PST-IPV and 8/12 standard PST completed all 4 sessions. Providers sometimes ignored IPV disclosures; risk/confidentiality discussion needed improvement.

   effect Estimate

   Not recorded

   uncertainty

   IPV was infrequently discussed and then for 1–4 minutes. Completion alone does not establish competent IPV response.

   primary Status

   secondary implementation

3. name

   Depressive symptoms and IPV

   follow Up

   Planned 9 weeks; 12/39 assessments occurred early

   result

   Descriptive symptoms/IPV scores fell in several arms; no powered causal comparison or effect size established.

   effect Estimate

   Follow-up medianPHQ-9: 6 PST-IPV, 6 standard PST, 4 enhanced usual care in the full sample; these are descriptive medians with unequal selected follow-up denominators.

   uncertainty

   No significant-benefit claim. IPV recall windows overlapped; misallocation confounds group comparison.

   primary Status

   pilot clinical measures

4. name

   Safety

   follow Up

   During trial and births by data-collection end

   result

   One serious adverse event: assault by husband. Two obstructed/prolonged-labour complications among 29 participants who had delivered.

   effect Estimate

   Not recorded

   uncertainty

   Assault arm and relatedness to participation not reported; incomplete obstetric follow-up. Safe-delivery conclusion is not zero-harm evidence.

   primary Status

   secondary implementation

quality

risk Of Bias

High concern for comparative causal inference because 17/52 entered the wrong allocation table and arm-closing rules generated uneven groups; masked assessors/analysts do not repair this. No formal RoB/Jadad score.

attrition

13/52 (25%)missing follow-up: 5 moved, 4 untraceable, 4 declined (often postnatal confinement). Arm follow-up 19/25, 8/12, 12/15. Nonresponders younger (median 20 vs 25.5) and apparently more trauma-symptomatic. 12/39 assessments occurred 37–61 days rather than target 63.

confounding

Three-arm intended sample 35 and full sample 52 are reported separately. Shared controls with linked depression trial must not be counted as independent evidence. No powered efficacy test; differences in clinical medians are not treatment effects.

adverse Findings

One serious adverse event was assault by husband; assignment and treatment relatedness unreported. Two obstructed/prolonged-labour complications among 29 delivered. Independent assessors found risk/confidentiality discussions needed improvement, and some providers did not respond to IPV disclosure.

transfer Limits

Rural Amharic-speaking pregnant women with depressive symptoms and IPV; imminent risk/psychosis/emergency care excluded. No long-term follow-up, no established adolescent subgroup effect.

jadad

not established

masking Roles

participants

No participant masking procedure established; active sessions versus leaflet care differ.

providers

Explicitly unmasked; separate provider groups trained for each active intervention.

assessors

Independent collectors exchanged recruitment sites for follow-up and were masked, with unmasking incidents to be documented; no incident count reported.

analysts

Explicitly masked to allocation.

population

relation

direct

population

Pregnant women with depressive symptoms and past-year IPV.

exposure Evidence

Pregnant 12–34 weeks, depressive symptoms PHQ-9≥5 plus functional impact and past-year IPV by non-graphic or WHO screen; psychological/emotional IPV qualifies.

rationale

Explicit domestic/intimate-partner violence exposure in the studied population; psychological intervention is within Language scope.

transfer Limit

See limitation and quality fields; no population-wide clinical recommendation is implied.

count

Not recorded

source

Not recorded

retrieved At

Not recorded

status

not-assessed

language

Not recorded

status

approved-for-publication

approved By

Ben Korbel

approved At

2026-11-01

assessment

AI assessed; human approved for publication

scope

Qualified research-library summaries. No professional clinical peer review or treatment recommendation is claimed.

source Revision

audit-r2-54991bc67916

source Content Hash

54991bc67916d3d5951f9eb1eb38c1cdb7278e19baa3e46ec94720f3dd5cbd33

level

full-text

source URLs

https://www.ebi.ac.uk/europepmc/webservices/rest/search?query=EXT_ID:37889918%20AND%20SRC:MED&format=json&resultType=core · https://api.crossref.org/works/10.1371%2Fjournal.pgph.0002054 · https://www.ebi.ac.uk/europepmc/webservices/rest/PMC10610520/fullTextXML

retrieved At

2026-10-30T08:21:40.085701+00:00

auditor

Codex (AI)

completed At

2026-10-31T05:11:05.655793+00:00

prior Content Hash

a8b708e75848ba81679661cf66d65e1b1cb8bbb93e019a178f14983d0ef3604b

prior Revision

r1-a8b708e75848

prior Source

frozen-120

source Verification

id

dv-adult-therapy-37889918

doi

10.1371/journal.pgph.0002054

pmid

37889918

fresh Metadata

Europe PMC core

metadata Retrieved

true

metadata SHA256

eab456b0d5f24ba0913467792baae86ab5dfb34b0ae53f13bcf97012e783d4d0

claim Check

Headline finding/design/limitations compared with indexed abstract or accessible primary evidence; retained methods amendments separately adjudicated.

sources

https://www.ebi.ac.uk/europepmc/webservices/rest/search?query=EXT_ID:37889918%20AND%20SRC:MED&format=json&resultType=core · https://api.crossref.org/works/10.1371%2Fjournal.pgph.0002054

applied Proposals

methods-adult/proposed-candidates.json

method

AI editorial assessment of all 130 publication records: compare identity, headline finding, design, relevance and limitations with indexed abstracts or available primary material; adjudicate retained source-supported methods amendments. This is a source-limited publication audit, not an independent full-text systematic review or a clinical guideline.

limitations

Abstract-only records do not establish allocation concealment, complete harms reporting or full risk of bias. · No formal independent RoB 2, GRADE appraisal or numerical reconstruction of every effect was performed. · Source-access labels describe retained appraisal evidence; fuller prior appraisals were checked through their source ledgers and selected material, not independently repeated in full. · Publication counts are not independent trial or participant counts; cohort links and overlapping review evidence remain provisional. · A randomized design cross does not indicate benefit, low risk of bias or human approval. No double-blind trial is verified in this release. · No professional clinical peer review is claimed. Recommended content is limited to accurately qualified research summaries.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgph.0002054 · https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37889918/ · https://www.ebi.ac.uk/europepmc/webservices/rest/search?query=EXT_ID:37889918%20AND%20SRC:MED&format=json&resultType=core · https://api.crossref.org/works/10.1371%2Fjournal.pgph.0002054 · https://www.ebi.ac.uk/europepmc/webservices/rest/PMC10610520/fullTextXML

language

Clinical & self-report · Methods & context

count

Not recorded

source

Not recorded

retrieved At

Not recorded

status

not-assessed

category

rct

is Randomized Controlled Trial

true

basis

Independent statistician generated 3-arm 2: 1: 1 table; coordinator/research assistant retained tables and received calls after baseline. Enrollment in an arm closed at 25. Seventeen of 52 women misclassified as no IPV were instead allocated by linked trial’s 2-arm table, excluding their opportunity forPST-IPV; authors note possible nonrandom allocation from baseline imbalance.

sources

https://www.ebi.ac.uk/europepmc/webservices/rest/search?query=EXT_ID:37889918%20AND%20SRC:MED&format=json&resultType=core · https://api.crossref.org/works/10.1371%2Fjournal.pgph.0002054 · https://www.ebi.ac.uk/europepmc/webservices/rest/PMC10610520/fullTextXML

review Scope

full-text

scope

Paper

status

assessed

score

2

randomized Controlled Trial

true

peer Reviewed

true

blinding

not-confirmed

basis

Independent statistician generated 3-arm 2: 1: 1 table; coordinator/research assistant retained tables and received calls after baseline. Enrollment in an arm closed at 25. Seventeen of 52 women misclassified as no IPV were instead allocated by linked trial’s 2-arm table, excluding their opportunity forPST-IPV; authors note possible nonrandom allocation from baseline imbalance.

sources

https://www.ebi.ac.uk/europepmc/webservices/rest/search?query=EXT_ID:37889918%20AND%20SRC:MED&format=json&resultType=core · https://api.crossref.org/works/10.1371%2Fjournal.pgph.0002054 · https://www.ebi.ac.uk/europepmc/webservices/rest/PMC10610520/fullTextXML

review Scope

full-text

human Approval

false

display Crosses

2

masking Roles

participants

No participant masking procedure established; active sessions versus leaflet care differ.

providers

Explicitly unmasked; separate provider groups trained for each active intervention.

assessors

Independent collectors exchanged recruitment sites for follow-up and were masked, with unmasking incidents to be documented; no incident count reported.

analysts

Explicitly masked to allocation.

rating Scale

library-trust-factor/1-3

language

Not recorded

1. key

   language:domestic-family-violence

   title

   Domestic & Family Violence

   collection

   language

   trust Score

   2

1. id

   language-dv-dv-adult-therapy-37889918

   aliases

   None recorded

   title

   Problem-solving therapy for pregnant women experiencing depressive symptoms and intimate partner violence: A randomised, controlled feasibility trial in rural Ethiopia.

   authors

   Keynejad RC; Bitew T; Sorsdahl K; Myers B; Honikman S; Medhin G; Deyessa N; Mulushoa A; Fekadu E; Howard LM; Hanlon C

   year

   2023

   journal

   PLOS global public health

   doi

   10.1371/journal.pgph.0002054

   pmid

   37889918

   urls

   https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgph.0002054 · https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37889918/ · https://www.ebi.ac.uk/europepmc/webservices/rest/search?query=EXT_ID:37889918%20AND%20SRC:MED&format=json&resultType=core · https://api.crossref.org/works/10.1371%2Fjournal.pgph.0002054 · https://www.ebi.ac.uk/europepmc/webservices/rest/PMC10610520/fullTextXML

   collections

   language

   categories

   Clinical & self-report · Methods & context

   targets

   None recorded

   neurotransmitters

   None recorded

   conditions

   depression

   condition Evidence

   1. id

      depression

      evidence

      1. field

         title

         text

         Problem-solving therapy for pregnant women experiencing depressive symptoms and intimate partner violence: A randomised, controlled feasibility trial in rural Ethiopia.

         matched Text

         depressive

      2. field

         population

         text

         Pregnant women with depressive symptoms and past-year IPV.

         matched Text

         depressive

      3. field

         outcomes

         text

         Implementation feasibility | Acceptability and delivery fidelity | Depressive symptoms and IPV | Safety

         matched Text

         Depressive

      scope

      Study population or investigated outcome; not a diagnosis or efficacy claim.

   age Groups

   adults

   age Population

   record Id

   dv-adult-therapy-37889918

   collections

   language

   groups

   adults

   reported Ages

   Eligibility≥16 years; arm medians 25–25.5 years. Actual minimum/maximum and count under 18 not reported.

   youth Scope

   Not recorded

   youth Source Note

   Adolescent eligibility is not proof of enrolled adolescent participants; no adolescent-specific outcomes.

   source URL

   https://www.ebi.ac.uk/europepmc/webservices/rest/search?query=EXT_ID:37889918%20AND%20SRC:MED&format=json&resultType=core

   basis Type

   source-limited-ai-editorial-assessment

   classification Note

   Original age terms: adults, adolescent eligibility. Programme targets or possible eligibility are not counted as observed ages.

   community Matches

   1. category Id

      domestic-violence

      relation

      direct

   kind

   Journal article

   design

   Randomized controlled feasibility study with material allocation-protocol deviations

   origin

   approved-dv-20261101

   priority

   1

   quotes

   None recorded

   finding

   PST-IPV was implementable with adaptations, but serious allocation errors, 25% missing follow-up and short descriptive assessment preclude an efficacy conclusion. One serious assault event was reported without arm or causal attribution.

   summary

   PST-IPV was implementable with adaptations, but serious allocation errors, 25% missing follow-up and short descriptive assessment preclude an efficacy conclusion. One serious assault event was reported without arm or causal attribution.

   limitation

   Seventeen women with psychological/emotional IPV had no chance of assignment toPST-IPV; baseline imbalance suggests possible nonrandom allocation. Twelve of 39 assessments occurred before 9 weeks. Underpowered feasibility, missing follow-up, provider fidelity problems and overlapping IPV recall periods limit interpretation.

   evidence

   evidence Type

   Randomized controlled feasibility study with material allocation-protocol deviations

   intervention

   Four-session problem-solving therapy adapted with trauma/IPV-informed training, risk awareness and avoidance of victim blaming; sessions address participants’ chosen problems. Four sessions within 8 weeks; mean session durations approximately 32–51 minutes. 19/25 completed all 4; 5 attended none, 1 attended one.

   comparator

   Four-session standard PST (12 women) or enhanced usual care (15 women: well-being leaflet and local support information). All arms additional to routine antenatal care. Shared comparator structure with linked depression feasibility trial.

   sample

   Final 25 PST-IPV/12 standard PST/15 enhanced usual care. Only 35 entered intended three-arm allocation (25/5/5); 17 psychological/emotional-IPV women were wrongly routed to linked two-arm table. Follow-up 19/25, 8/12, 12/15.

   measurement

   Implementation feasibility; Acceptability and delivery fidelity; Depressive symptoms and IPV; Safety

   timing

   Recruitment 35 days; follow-up planned 9 weeks; Four-session intervention over 8 weeks; Planned 9 weeks; 12/39 assessments occurred early; During trial and births by data-collection end

   trial Id

   PACTR202002513482084

   relationship Note

   Explicit domestic/intimate-partner violence exposure in the studied population; psychological intervention is within Language scope. See limitation and quality fields; no population-wide clinical recommendation is implied.

   measured Genes

   None recorded

   pathways

   None recorded

   source Access

   level

   full-text

   source URLs

   https://www.ebi.ac.uk/europepmc/webservices/rest/search?query=EXT_ID:37889918%20AND%20SRC:MED&format=json&resultType=core · https://api.crossref.org/works/10.1371%2Fjournal.pgph.0002054 · https://www.ebi.ac.uk/europepmc/webservices/rest/PMC10610520/fullTextXML

   retrieved At

   2026-10-30T08:21:40.085701+00:00

   outcomes

   1. name

      Implementation feasibility

      follow Up

      Recruitment 35 days; follow-up planned 9 weeks

      result

      52 eligiblewomen enrolled; 39/52 completed assessment; delivery feasible with changes required to randomization, provider skills and scheduling.

      effect Estimate

      Not recorded

      uncertainty

      Primary aim was feasibility, not powered comparative efficacy.

      primary Status

      primary

   2. name

      Acceptability and delivery fidelity

      follow Up

      Four-session intervention over 8 weeks

      result

      19/25 PST-IPV and 8/12 standard PST completed all 4 sessions. Providers sometimes ignored IPV disclosures; risk/confidentiality discussion needed improvement.

      effect Estimate

      Not recorded

      uncertainty

      IPV was infrequently discussed and then for 1–4 minutes. Completion alone does not establish competent IPV response.

      primary Status

      secondary implementation

   3. name

      Depressive symptoms and IPV

      follow Up

      Planned 9 weeks; 12/39 assessments occurred early

      result

      Descriptive symptoms/IPV scores fell in several arms; no powered causal comparison or effect size established.

      effect Estimate

      Follow-up medianPHQ-9: 6 PST-IPV, 6 standard PST, 4 enhanced usual care in the full sample; these are descriptive medians with unequal selected follow-up denominators.

      uncertainty

      No significant-benefit claim. IPV recall windows overlapped; misallocation confounds group comparison.

      primary Status

      pilot clinical measures

   4. name

      Safety

      follow Up

      During trial and births by data-collection end

      result

      One serious adverse event: assault by husband. Two obstructed/prolonged-labour complications among 29 participants who had delivered.

      effect Estimate

      Not recorded

      uncertainty

      Assault arm and relatedness to participation not reported; incomplete obstetric follow-up. Safe-delivery conclusion is not zero-harm evidence.

      primary Status

      secondary implementation

   quality

   risk Of Bias

   High concern for comparative causal inference because 17/52 entered the wrong allocation table and arm-closing rules generated uneven groups; masked assessors/analysts do not repair this. No formal RoB/Jadad score.

   attrition

   13/52 (25%)missing follow-up: 5 moved, 4 untraceable, 4 declined (often postnatal confinement). Arm follow-up 19/25, 8/12, 12/15. Nonresponders younger (median 20 vs 25.5) and apparently more trauma-symptomatic. 12/39 assessments occurred 37–61 days rather than target 63.

   confounding

   Three-arm intended sample 35 and full sample 52 are reported separately. Shared controls with linked depression trial must not be counted as independent evidence. No powered efficacy test; differences in clinical medians are not treatment effects.

   adverse Findings

   One serious adverse event was assault by husband; assignment and treatment relatedness unreported. Two obstructed/prolonged-labour complications among 29 delivered. Independent assessors found risk/confidentiality discussions needed improvement, and some providers did not respond to IPV disclosure.

   transfer Limits

   Rural Amharic-speaking pregnant women with depressive symptoms and IPV; imminent risk/psychosis/emergency care excluded. No long-term follow-up, no established adolescent subgroup effect.

   jadad

   not established

   masking Roles

   participants

   No participant masking procedure established; active sessions versus leaflet care differ.

   providers

   Explicitly unmasked; separate provider groups trained for each active intervention.

   assessors

   Independent collectors exchanged recruitment sites for follow-up and were masked, with unmasking incidents to be documented; no incident count reported.

   analysts

   Explicitly masked to allocation.

   population

   relation

   direct

   population

   Pregnant women with depressive symptoms and past-year IPV.

   exposure Evidence

   Pregnant 12–34 weeks, depressive symptoms PHQ-9≥5 plus functional impact and past-year IPV by non-graphic or WHO screen; psychological/emotional IPV qualifies.

   rationale

   Explicit domestic/intimate-partner violence exposure in the studied population; psychological intervention is within Language scope.

   transfer Limit

   See limitation and quality fields; no population-wide clinical recommendation is implied.

   study Design Assessment

   category

   rct

   is Randomized Controlled Trial

   true

   basis

   Independent statistician generated 3-arm 2: 1: 1 table; coordinator/research assistant retained tables and received calls after baseline. Enrollment in an arm closed at 25. Seventeen of 52 women misclassified as no IPV were instead allocated by linked trial’s 2-arm table, excluding their opportunity forPST-IPV; authors note possible nonrandom allocation from baseline imbalance.

   sources

   https://www.ebi.ac.uk/europepmc/webservices/rest/search?query=EXT_ID:37889918%20AND%20SRC:MED&format=json&resultType=core · https://api.crossref.org/works/10.1371%2Fjournal.pgph.0002054 · https://www.ebi.ac.uk/europepmc/webservices/rest/PMC10610520/fullTextXML

   review Scope

   full-text

   paper Trust Assessment

   scope

   Paper

   status

   assessed

   score

   2

   randomized Controlled Trial

   true

   peer Reviewed

   true

   blinding

   not-confirmed

   basis

   Independent statistician generated 3-arm 2: 1: 1 table; coordinator/research assistant retained tables and received calls after baseline. Enrollment in an arm closed at 25. Seventeen of 52 women misclassified as no IPV were instead allocated by linked trial’s 2-arm table, excluding their opportunity forPST-IPV; authors note possible nonrandom allocation from baseline imbalance.

   sources

   https://www.ebi.ac.uk/europepmc/webservices/rest/search?query=EXT_ID:37889918%20AND%20SRC:MED&format=json&resultType=core · https://api.crossref.org/works/10.1371%2Fjournal.pgph.0002054 · https://www.ebi.ac.uk/europepmc/webservices/rest/PMC10610520/fullTextXML

   review Scope

   full-text

   human Approval

   false

   display Crosses

   2

   masking Roles

   participants

   No participant masking procedure established; active sessions versus leaflet care differ.

   providers

   Explicitly unmasked; separate provider groups trained for each active intervention.

   assessors

   Independent collectors exchanged recruitment sites for follow-up and were masked, with unmasking incidents to be documented; no incident count reported.

   analysts

   Explicitly masked to allocation.

   rating Scale

   library-trust-factor/1-3

   jadad

   status

   unassessed

   score

   Not recorded

   citation Snapshot

   count

   Not recorded

   source

   Not recorded

   retrieved At

   Not recorded

   status

   not-assessed

   citation Count

   Not recorded

   publication Approval

   status

   approved-for-publication

   approved By

   Ben Korbel

   approved At

   2026-11-01

   assessment

   AI assessed; human approved for publication

   scope

   Qualified research-library summaries. No professional clinical peer review or treatment recommendation is claimed.

   source Revision

   audit-r2-54991bc67916

   source Content Hash

   54991bc67916d3d5951f9eb1eb38c1cdb7278e19baa3e46ec94720f3dd5cbd33

   source Access

   level

   full-text

   source URLs

   https://www.ebi.ac.uk/europepmc/webservices/rest/search?query=EXT_ID:37889918%20AND%20SRC:MED&format=json&resultType=core · https://api.crossref.org/works/10.1371%2Fjournal.pgph.0002054 · https://www.ebi.ac.uk/europepmc/webservices/rest/PMC10610520/fullTextXML

   retrieved At

   2026-10-30T08:21:40.085701+00:00

   study Family Id

   PACTR202002513482084

   family Linkage Uncertain

   false

   approaches

   None recorded

   record Id

   dv-adult-therapy-37889918

   source Pages

   None recorded

   editorial Audit

   auditor

   Codex (AI)

   completed At

   2026-10-31T05:11:05.655793+00:00

   prior Content Hash

   a8b708e75848ba81679661cf66d65e1b1cb8bbb93e019a178f14983d0ef3604b

   prior Revision

   r1-a8b708e75848

   prior Source

   frozen-120

   source Verification

   id

   dv-adult-therapy-37889918

   doi

   10.1371/journal.pgph.0002054

   pmid

   37889918

   fresh Metadata

   Europe PMC core

   metadata Retrieved

   true

   metadata SHA256

   eab456b0d5f24ba0913467792baae86ab5dfb34b0ae53f13bcf97012e783d4d0

   claim Check

   Headline finding/design/limitations compared with indexed abstract or accessible primary evidence; retained methods amendments separately adjudicated.

   sources

   https://www.ebi.ac.uk/europepmc/webservices/rest/search?query=EXT_ID:37889918%20AND%20SRC:MED&format=json&resultType=core · https://api.crossref.org/works/10.1371%2Fjournal.pgph.0002054

   applied Proposals

   methods-adult/proposed-candidates.json

   method

   AI editorial assessment of all 130 publication records: compare identity, headline finding, design, relevance and limitations with indexed abstracts or available primary material; adjudicate retained source-supported methods amendments. This is a source-limited publication audit, not an independent full-text systematic review or a clinical guideline.

   limitations

   Abstract-only records do not establish allocation concealment, complete harms reporting or full risk of bias. · No formal independent RoB 2, GRADE appraisal or numerical reconstruction of every effect was performed. · Source-access labels describe retained appraisal evidence; fuller prior appraisals were checked through their source ledgers and selected material, not independently repeated in full. · Publication counts are not independent trial or participant counts; cohort links and overlapping review evidence remain provisional. · A randomized design cross does not indicate benefit, low risk of bias or human approval. No double-blind trial is verified in this release. · No professional clinical peer review is claimed. Recommended content is limited to accurately qualified research summaries.

   assessment Record

   id

   dv-adult-therapy-37889918

   title

   Problem-solving therapy for pregnant women experiencing depressive symptoms and intimate partner violence: A randomised, controlled feasibility trial in rural Ethiopia.

   authors

   Keynejad RC · Bitew T · Sorsdahl K · Myers B · Honikman S · Medhin G · Deyessa N · Mulushoa A · Fekadu E · Howard LM · Hanlon C

   year

   2023

   journal

   PLOS global public health

   doi

   10.1371/journal.pgph.0002054

   pmid

   37889918

   trial Registration

   PACTR202002513482084

   collection

   language

   intervention Family

   Problem-solving therapy adapted for IPV.

   publication Type

   Primary intervention study

   study Family Id

   PACTR202002513482084

   family Linkage Uncertain

   false

   existing Repository Matches

   None recorded

   relevance

   relation

   direct

   population

   Pregnant women with depressive symptoms and past-year IPV.

   exposure Evidence

   Pregnant 12–34 weeks, depressive symptoms PHQ-9≥5 plus functional impact and past-year IPV by non-graphic or WHO screen; psychological/emotional IPV qualifies.

   rationale

   Explicit domestic/intimate-partner violence exposure in the studied population; psychological intervention is within Language scope.

   transfer Limit

   See limitation and quality fields; no population-wide clinical recommendation is implied.

   age

   groups

   adults · adolescent eligibility

   reported Range

   Eligibility≥16 years; arm medians 25–25.5 years. Actual minimum/maximum and count under 18 not reported.

   youth Scope

   Adolescent eligibility is not proof of enrolled adolescent participants; no adolescent-specific outcomes.

   country

   Ethiopia

   setting

   Bu’i primary hospital and Kela health centre, rural Sodo district, Ethiopia; recruitmentApril–May 2021.

   sample Size

   randomized

   52

   analyzed

   39

   description

   Final 25 PST-IPV/12 standard PST/15 enhanced usual care. Only 35 entered intended three-arm allocation (25/5/5); 17 psychological/emotional-IPV women were wrongly routed to linked two-arm table. Follow-up 19/25, 8/12, 12/15.

   intervention

   description

   Four-session problem-solving therapy adapted with trauma/IPV-informed training, risk awareness and avoidance of victim blaming; sessions address participants’ chosen problems.

   dose

   Four sessions within 8 weeks; mean session durations approximately 32–51 minutes. 19/25 completed all 4; 5 attended none, 1 attended one.

   provider

   Six trained antenatal-care providers for PST-IPV, separately trained from six standard PST providers; psychiatrist/psychologist training and supervision with audio-sampled fidelity assessment.

   comparator

   Four-session standard PST (12 women) or enhanced usual care (15 women: well-being leaflet and local support information). All arms additional to routine antenatal care. Shared comparator structure with linked depression feasibility trial.

   outcomes

   1. name

      Implementation feasibility

      follow Up

      Recruitment 35 days; follow-up planned 9 weeks

      result

      52 eligiblewomen enrolled; 39/52 completed assessment; delivery feasible with changes required to randomization, provider skills and scheduling.

      effect Estimate

      Not recorded

      uncertainty

      Primary aim was feasibility, not powered comparative efficacy.

      primary Status

      primary

   2. name

      Acceptability and delivery fidelity

      follow Up

      Four-session intervention over 8 weeks

      result

      19/25 PST-IPV and 8/12 standard PST completed all 4 sessions. Providers sometimes ignored IPV disclosures; risk/confidentiality discussion needed improvement.

      effect Estimate

      Not recorded

      uncertainty

      IPV was infrequently discussed and then for 1–4 minutes. Completion alone does not establish competent IPV response.

      primary Status

      secondary implementation

   3. name

      Depressive symptoms and IPV

      follow Up

      Planned 9 weeks; 12/39 assessments occurred early

      result

      Descriptive symptoms/IPV scores fell in several arms; no powered causal comparison or effect size established.

      effect Estimate

      Follow-up medianPHQ-9: 6 PST-IPV, 6 standard PST, 4 enhanced usual care in the full sample; these are descriptive medians with unequal selected follow-up denominators.

      uncertainty

      No significant-benefit claim. IPV recall windows overlapped; misallocation confounds group comparison.

      primary Status

      pilot clinical measures

   4. name

      Safety

      follow Up

      During trial and births by data-collection end

      result

      One serious adverse event: assault by husband. Two obstructed/prolonged-labour complications among 29 participants who had delivered.

      effect Estimate

      Not recorded

      uncertainty

      Assault arm and relatedness to participation not reported; incomplete obstetric follow-up. Safe-delivery conclusion is not zero-harm evidence.

      primary Status

      secondary implementation

   finding

   PST-IPV was implementable with adaptations, but serious allocation errors, 25% missing follow-up and short descriptive assessment preclude an efficacy conclusion. One serious assault event was reported without arm or causal attribution.

   limitation

   Seventeen women with psychological/emotional IPV had no chance of assignment toPST-IPV; baseline imbalance suggests possible nonrandom allocation. Twelve of 39 assessments occurred before 9 weeks. Underpowered feasibility, missing follow-up, provider fidelity problems and overlapping IPV recall periods limit interpretation.

   design

   type

   Randomized controlled feasibility study with material allocation-protocol deviations

   randomization Evidence

   Independent statistician generated 3-arm 2: 1: 1 table; coordinator/research assistant retained tables and received calls after baseline. Enrollment in an arm closed at 25. Seventeen of 52 women misclassified as no IPV were instead allocated by linked trial’s 2-arm table, excluding their opportunity forPST-IPV; authors note possible nonrandom allocation from baseline imbalance.

   masking

   participants

   No participant masking procedure established; active sessions versus leaflet care differ.

   providers

   Explicitly unmasked; separate provider groups trained for each active intervention.

   assessors

   Independent collectors exchanged recruitment sites for follow-up and were masked, with unmasking incidents to be documented; no incident count reported.

   analysts

   Explicitly masked to allocation.

   crosses

   1

   cross Rationale

   Random tables and controlled allocation are verified, but one third were routed through the wrong allocation scheme. Retain one design cross with this prominent qualification; no double-blind claim and no reliable efficacy inference.

   quality

   risk Of Bias

   High concern for comparative causal inference because 17/52 entered the wrong allocation table and arm-closing rules generated uneven groups; masked assessors/analysts do not repair this. No formal RoB/Jadad score.

   attrition

   13/52 (25%)missing follow-up: 5 moved, 4 untraceable, 4 declined (often postnatal confinement). Arm follow-up 19/25, 8/12, 12/15. Nonresponders younger (median 20 vs 25.5) and apparently more trauma-symptomatic. 12/39 assessments occurred 37–61 days rather than target 63.

   confounding

   Three-arm intended sample 35 and full sample 52 are reported separately. Shared controls with linked depression trial must not be counted as independent evidence. No powered efficacy test; differences in clinical medians are not treatment effects.

   adverse Findings

   One serious adverse event was assault by husband; assignment and treatment relatedness unreported. Two obstructed/prolonged-labour complications among 29 delivered. Independent assessors found risk/confidentiality discussions needed improvement, and some providers did not respond to IPV disclosure.

   transfer Limits

   Rural Amharic-speaking pregnant women with depressive symptoms and IPV; imminent risk/psychosis/emergency care excluded. No long-term follow-up, no established adolescent subgroup effect.

   jadad

   not established

   access

   level

   full-text

   source URLs

   https://www.ebi.ac.uk/europepmc/webservices/rest/search?query=EXT_ID:37889918%20AND%20SRC:MED&format=json&resultType=core · https://api.crossref.org/works/10.1371%2Fjournal.pgph.0002054 · https://www.ebi.ac.uk/europepmc/webservices/rest/PMC10610520/fullTextXML

   retrieved At

   2026-10-30T08:21:40.085701+00:00

   sources

   1. url

      https://www.ebi.ac.uk/europepmc/webservices/rest/search?query=EXT_ID:37889918%20AND%20SRC:MED&format=json&resultType=core

      type

      Europe PMC core record sourced from PubMed/MEDLINE

      retrieved At

      2026-10-30T07:15:55.705516+00:00

      identity Verified

      true

      notes

      Primary-publication abstract and bibliographic metadata accessed; canonical PubMed record: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37889918/

      retrieval Query URL

      https://www.ebi.ac.uk/europepmc/webservices/rest/search?query=TITLE_ABS%3A%28%22intimate+partner+violence%22+OR+%22domestic+violence%22+OR+%22battered+women%22%29+AND+TITLE_ABS%3A%28randomized+OR+randomised%29+AND+TITLE_ABS%3A%28therapy+OR+psychological+OR+psychotherapy+OR+cognitive+OR+counseling+OR+counselling+OR+%22motivational+interviewing%22%29&format=json&resultType=core&pageSize=1000

   2. url

      https://api.crossref.org/works/10.1371%2Fjournal.pgph.0002054

      type

      Crossref DOI registration metadata

      retrieved At

      2026-10-30T07:20:01.507627+00:00

      identity Verified

      true

      notes

      DOI identity cross-check; metadata title: Problem-solving therapy for pregnant women experiencing depressive symptoms and intimate partner violence: A randomised, controlled feasibility trial in rural Ethiopia. Correction/update relations checked.

   3. url

      https://www.ebi.ac.uk/europepmc/webservices/rest/PMC10610520/fullTextXML

      type

      primary-full-text

      retrieved At

      2026-10-30T08:21:40.085701+00:00

      identity Verified

      true

      notes

      Full primary report methods, results, tables and discussion inspected.

   publication Status

   status

   epublish

   correction Retraction Check

   europe PMCpub Types

   research-article · Journal Article

   crossref Update Relations

   None recorded

   crossref Relations

   crossref Checked

   true

   uncertainty

   No comprehensive publisher/Crossmark or registry audit claimed; correction/retraction absence is limited to accessed metadata.

   recommendation Rationale

   Retain as pending candidate evidence; interpret the study design, null outcomes and access limits together.

   review

   status

   pending

   reviewer

   Not recorded

   assessment Status

   assessed

   assessment Notes

   Full primary report methods, results, tables and discussion inspected. · This proposal is not human approval. It revises an existing publication without increasing screened, publication or study-family totals. · PACTR 202002513482084 preserved. Linked standard PST/depression trial shares control structure; 35 correctly randomized versus 17 misclassified women are not separate independent experiments. · Feasibility results remain review-ready with central misallocation and SAE caveats. Assault attribution is unreported, not assumed either related or unrelated.

   review Ready

   true

   review Readiness

   ai-editorial-audit-complete-release-pending

   research Lane

   adult-therapy

   later Review Evidence

   id

   dv-adult-therapy-37889918

   title

   Problem-solving therapy for pregnant women experiencing depressive symptoms and intimate partner violence: A randomised, controlled feasibility trial in rural Ethiopia.

   prior Revision

   r1-a8b708e75848

   prior Content Hash

   a8b708e75848ba81679661cf66d65e1b1cb8bbb93e019a178f14983d0ef3604b

   original

   review Ready

   true

   review Readiness

   ready-with-access-limits

   finding

   Recruitment and attendance were feasible, but allocation fidelity and provider communication needed improvement; this was not a powered efficacy trial.

   limitation

   Small feasibility trial; cultural interpretation of IPV impeded fidelity to randomization.

   adverse Findings

   Adverse-event reporting not established from accessed source; absence of reporting is not evidence of no harm.

   crosses

   1

   access

   abstract

   action

   amend

   hold Current Revision

   true

   cross Verification On Hold

   false

   new Evidence

   Seventeen of 52 women were routed through a wrong allocation table and could not receive PST-IPV; only 35 entered the intended three-arm process. One serious adverse event was an assault by a participant’s husband; arm and causal attribution are unreported. Follow-up was missing for 13/52 and occurred early for 12/39 respondents.

   revised Interpretation

   Treat this as feasibility learning with allocation and outcome-timing problems, not comparative efficacy. Report the assault without attributing it to the intervention or claiming absence of harm.

   required Before Approval

   Add the allocation deviation, assault and missing attribution to a new revision before approval. Arm-specific causal interpretation remains unavailable.

   source URLs

   https://journals.plos.org/globalpublichealth/article?id=10.1371/journal.pgph.0002054 · https://www.ebi.ac.uk/europepmc/webservices/rest/PMC10610520/fullTextXML

   source Location

   Randomisation; Protocol deviations; Feasibility; Safety; Discussion

   assessment Changed

   false

   human Approval

   false

   publication Recommendation

   status

   recommended-summary

   reason

   Suitable as a qualified research-library summary at the stated source-access level. This is not a conclusion that the intervention is effective or safe.

   scope

   Research summary only; no treatment recommendation

   human Release Approval

   false

   editorial Audit

   auditor

   Codex (AI)

   completed At

   2026-10-31T05:11:05.655793+00:00

   prior Content Hash

   a8b708e75848ba81679661cf66d65e1b1cb8bbb93e019a178f14983d0ef3604b

   prior Revision

   r1-a8b708e75848

   prior Source

   frozen-120

   source Verification

   id

   dv-adult-therapy-37889918

   doi

   10.1371/journal.pgph.0002054

   pmid

   37889918

   fresh Metadata

   Europe PMC core

   metadata Retrieved

   true

   metadata SHA256

   eab456b0d5f24ba0913467792baae86ab5dfb34b0ae53f13bcf97012e783d4d0

   claim Check

   Headline finding/design/limitations compared with indexed abstract or accessible primary evidence; retained methods amendments separately adjudicated.

   sources

   https://www.ebi.ac.uk/europepmc/webservices/rest/search?query=EXT_ID:37889918%20AND%20SRC:MED&format=json&resultType=core · https://api.crossref.org/works/10.1371%2Fjournal.pgph.0002054

   applied Proposals

   methods-adult/proposed-candidates.json

   method

   AI editorial assessment of all 130 publication records: compare identity, headline finding, design, relevance and limitations with indexed abstracts or available primary material; adjudicate retained source-supported methods amendments. This is a source-limited publication audit, not an independent full-text systematic review or a clinical guideline.

   limitations

   Abstract-only records do not establish allocation concealment, complete harms reporting or full risk of bias. · No formal independent RoB 2, GRADE appraisal or numerical reconstruction of every effect was performed. · Source-access labels describe retained appraisal evidence; fuller prior appraisals were checked through their source ledgers and selected material, not independently repeated in full. · Publication counts are not independent trial or participant counts; cohort links and overlapping review evidence remain provisional. · A randomized design cross does not indicate benefit, low risk of bias or human approval. No double-blind trial is verified in this release. · No professional clinical peer review is claimed. Recommended content is limited to accurately qualified research summaries.

   study Design Assessment

   category

   rct

   is Randomized Controlled Trial

   true

   basis

   Independent statistician generated 3-arm 2: 1: 1 table; coordinator/research assistant retained tables and received calls after baseline. Enrollment in an arm closed at 25. Seventeen of 52 women misclassified as no IPV were instead allocated by linked trial’s 2-arm table, excluding their opportunity forPST-IPV; authors note possible nonrandom allocation from baseline imbalance.

   sources

   https://www.ebi.ac.uk/europepmc/webservices/rest/search?query=EXT_ID:37889918%20AND%20SRC:MED&format=json&resultType=core · https://api.crossref.org/works/10.1371%2Fjournal.pgph.0002054 · https://www.ebi.ac.uk/europepmc/webservices/rest/PMC10610520/fullTextXML

   review Scope

   full-text

   paper Trust Assessment

   scope

   Paper

   status

   assessed

   score

   2

   randomized Controlled Trial

   true

   peer Reviewed

   true

   blinding

   not-confirmed

   basis

   Random tables and controlled allocation are verified, but one third were routed through the wrong allocation scheme. Retain one design cross with this prominent qualification; no double-blind claim and no reliable efficacy inference.

   sources

   https://www.ebi.ac.uk/europepmc/webservices/rest/search?query=EXT_ID:37889918%20AND%20SRC:MED&format=json&resultType=core · https://api.crossref.org/works/10.1371%2Fjournal.pgph.0002054 · https://www.ebi.ac.uk/europepmc/webservices/rest/PMC10610520/fullTextXML

   review Scope

   full-text

   human Approval

   false

   display Crosses

   1

   masking Roles

   participants

   No participant masking procedure established; active sessions versus leaflet care differ.

   providers

   Explicitly unmasked; separate provider groups trained for each active intervention.

   assessors

   Independent collectors exchanged recruitment sites for follow-up and were masked, with unmasking incidents to be documented; no incident count reported.

   analysts

   Explicitly masked to allocation.

   jadad

   status

   unassessed

   score

   Not recorded

   evidence

   population

   relation

   direct

   population

   Pregnant women with depressive symptoms and past-year IPV.

   exposure Evidence

   Pregnant 12–34 weeks, depressive symptoms PHQ-9≥5 plus functional impact and past-year IPV by non-graphic or WHO screen; psychological/emotional IPV qualifies.

   rationale

   Explicit domestic/intimate-partner violence exposure in the studied population; psychological intervention is within Language scope.

   transfer Limit

   See limitation and quality fields; no population-wide clinical recommendation is implied.

   intervention

   description

   Four-session problem-solving therapy adapted with trauma/IPV-informed training, risk awareness and avoidance of victim blaming; sessions address participants’ chosen problems.

   dose

   Four sessions within 8 weeks; mean session durations approximately 32–51 minutes. 19/25 completed all 4; 5 attended none, 1 attended one.

   provider

   Six trained antenatal-care providers for PST-IPV, separately trained from six standard PST providers; psychiatrist/psychologist training and supervision with audio-sampled fidelity assessment.

   comparator

   Four-session standard PST (12 women) or enhanced usual care (15 women: well-being leaflet and local support information). All arms additional to routine antenatal care. Shared comparator structure with linked depression feasibility trial.

   outcomes

   1. name

      Implementation feasibility

      follow Up

      Recruitment 35 days; follow-up planned 9 weeks

      result

      52 eligiblewomen enrolled; 39/52 completed assessment; delivery feasible with changes required to randomization, provider skills and scheduling.

      effect Estimate

      Not recorded

      uncertainty

      Primary aim was feasibility, not powered comparative efficacy.

      primary Status

      primary

   2. name

      Acceptability and delivery fidelity

      follow Up

      Four-session intervention over 8 weeks

      result

      19/25 PST-IPV and 8/12 standard PST completed all 4 sessions. Providers sometimes ignored IPV disclosures; risk/confidentiality discussion needed improvement.

      effect Estimate

      Not recorded

      uncertainty

      IPV was infrequently discussed and then for 1–4 minutes. Completion alone does not establish competent IPV response.

      primary Status

      secondary implementation

   3. name

      Depressive symptoms and IPV

      follow Up

      Planned 9 weeks; 12/39 assessments occurred early

      result

      Descriptive symptoms/IPV scores fell in several arms; no powered causal comparison or effect size established.

      effect Estimate

      Follow-up medianPHQ-9: 6 PST-IPV, 6 standard PST, 4 enhanced usual care in the full sample; these are descriptive medians with unequal selected follow-up denominators.

      uncertainty

      No significant-benefit claim. IPV recall windows overlapped; misallocation confounds group comparison.

      primary Status

      pilot clinical measures

   4. name

      Safety

      follow Up

      During trial and births by data-collection end

      result

      One serious adverse event: assault by husband. Two obstructed/prolonged-labour complications among 29 participants who had delivered.

      effect Estimate

      Not recorded

      uncertainty

      Assault arm and relatedness to participation not reported; incomplete obstetric follow-up. Safe-delivery conclusion is not zero-harm evidence.

      primary Status

      secondary implementation

   access

   level

   full-text

   source URLs

   https://www.ebi.ac.uk/europepmc/webservices/rest/search?query=EXT_ID:37889918%20AND%20SRC:MED&format=json&resultType=core · https://api.crossref.org/works/10.1371%2Fjournal.pgph.0002054 · https://www.ebi.ac.uk/europepmc/webservices/rest/PMC10610520/fullTextXML

   retrieved At

   2026-10-30T08:21:40.085701+00:00

   citation Snapshot

   count

   Not recorded

   source

   Not recorded

   retrieved At

   Not recorded

   status

   not-assessed

   provenance

   Discovered by AI

   content Hash

   54991bc67916d3d5951f9eb1eb38c1cdb7278e19baa3e46ec94720f3dd5cbd33

   revision

   audit-r2-54991bc67916

   archive Entries

   None recorded

   collection

   language

   chapter Number

   5

   topic Id

   domestic-family-violence

   topic Title

   Domestic & Family Violence

   trust Score

   2

evidence Type

Randomized controlled feasibility study with material allocation-protocol deviations

intervention

Four-session problem-solving therapy adapted with trauma/IPV-informed training, risk awareness and avoidance of victim blaming; sessions address participants’ chosen problems. Four sessions within 8 weeks; mean session durations approximately 32–51 minutes. 19/25 completed all 4; 5 attended none, 1 attended one.

comparator

Four-session standard PST (12 women) or enhanced usual care (15 women: well-being leaflet and local support information). All arms additional to routine antenatal care. Shared comparator structure with linked depression feasibility trial.

sample

Final 25 PST-IPV/12 standard PST/15 enhanced usual care. Only 35 entered intended three-arm allocation (25/5/5); 17 psychological/emotional-IPV women were wrongly routed to linked two-arm table. Follow-up 19/25, 8/12, 12/15.

measurement

Implementation feasibility; Acceptability and delivery fidelity; Depressive symptoms and IPV; Safety

timing

Recruitment 35 days; follow-up planned 9 weeks; Four-session intervention over 8 weeks; Planned 9 weeks; 12/39 assessments occurred early; During trial and births by data-collection end

trial Id

PACTR202002513482084

relationship Note

Explicit domestic/intimate-partner violence exposure in the studied population; psychological intervention is within Language scope. See limitation and quality fields; no population-wide clinical recommendation is implied.

measured Genes

None recorded

pathways

None recorded

source Access

level

full-text

source URLs

https://www.ebi.ac.uk/europepmc/webservices/rest/search?query=EXT_ID:37889918%20AND%20SRC:MED&format=json&resultType=core · https://api.crossref.org/works/10.1371%2Fjournal.pgph.0002054 · https://www.ebi.ac.uk/europepmc/webservices/rest/PMC10610520/fullTextXML

retrieved At

2026-10-30T08:21:40.085701+00:00

outcomes

1. name

   Implementation feasibility

   follow Up

   Recruitment 35 days; follow-up planned 9 weeks

   result

   52 eligiblewomen enrolled; 39/52 completed assessment; delivery feasible with changes required to randomization, provider skills and scheduling.

   effect Estimate

   Not recorded

   uncertainty

   Primary aim was feasibility, not powered comparative efficacy.

   primary Status

   primary

2. name

   Acceptability and delivery fidelity

   follow Up

   Four-session intervention over 8 weeks

   result

   19/25 PST-IPV and 8/12 standard PST completed all 4 sessions. Providers sometimes ignored IPV disclosures; risk/confidentiality discussion needed improvement.

   effect Estimate

   Not recorded

   uncertainty

   IPV was infrequently discussed and then for 1–4 minutes. Completion alone does not establish competent IPV response.

   primary Status

   secondary implementation

3. name

   Depressive symptoms and IPV

   follow Up

   Planned 9 weeks; 12/39 assessments occurred early

   result

   Descriptive symptoms/IPV scores fell in several arms; no powered causal comparison or effect size established.

   effect Estimate

   Follow-up medianPHQ-9: 6 PST-IPV, 6 standard PST, 4 enhanced usual care in the full sample; these are descriptive medians with unequal selected follow-up denominators.

   uncertainty

   No significant-benefit claim. IPV recall windows overlapped; misallocation confounds group comparison.

   primary Status

   pilot clinical measures

4. name

   Safety

   follow Up

   During trial and births by data-collection end

   result

   One serious adverse event: assault by husband. Two obstructed/prolonged-labour complications among 29 participants who had delivered.

   effect Estimate

   Not recorded

   uncertainty

   Assault arm and relatedness to participation not reported; incomplete obstetric follow-up. Safe-delivery conclusion is not zero-harm evidence.

   primary Status

   secondary implementation

quality

risk Of Bias

High concern for comparative causal inference because 17/52 entered the wrong allocation table and arm-closing rules generated uneven groups; masked assessors/analysts do not repair this. No formal RoB/Jadad score.

attrition

13/52 (25%)missing follow-up: 5 moved, 4 untraceable, 4 declined (often postnatal confinement). Arm follow-up 19/25, 8/12, 12/15. Nonresponders younger (median 20 vs 25.5) and apparently more trauma-symptomatic. 12/39 assessments occurred 37–61 days rather than target 63.

confounding

Three-arm intended sample 35 and full sample 52 are reported separately. Shared controls with linked depression trial must not be counted as independent evidence. No powered efficacy test; differences in clinical medians are not treatment effects.

adverse Findings

One serious adverse event was assault by husband; assignment and treatment relatedness unreported. Two obstructed/prolonged-labour complications among 29 delivered. Independent assessors found risk/confidentiality discussions needed improvement, and some providers did not respond to IPV disclosure.

transfer Limits

Rural Amharic-speaking pregnant women with depressive symptoms and IPV; imminent risk/psychosis/emergency care excluded. No long-term follow-up, no established adolescent subgroup effect.

jadad

not established

masking Roles

participants

No participant masking procedure established; active sessions versus leaflet care differ.

providers

Explicitly unmasked; separate provider groups trained for each active intervention.

assessors

Independent collectors exchanged recruitment sites for follow-up and were masked, with unmasking incidents to be documented; no incident count reported.

analysts

Explicitly masked to allocation.

population

relation

direct

population

Pregnant women with depressive symptoms and past-year IPV.

exposure Evidence

Pregnant 12–34 weeks, depressive symptoms PHQ-9≥5 plus functional impact and past-year IPV by non-graphic or WHO screen; psychological/emotional IPV qualifies.

rationale

Explicit domestic/intimate-partner violence exposure in the studied population; psychological intervention is within Language scope.

transfer Limit

See limitation and quality fields; no population-wide clinical recommendation is implied.

status

unassessed

score

Not recorded

1. id

   depression

   evidence

   1. field

      title

      text

      Problem-solving therapy for pregnant women experiencing depressive symptoms and intimate partner violence: A randomised, controlled feasibility trial in rural Ethiopia.

      matched Text

      depressive

   2. field

      population

      text

      Pregnant women with depressive symptoms and past-year IPV.

      matched Text

      depressive

   3. field

      outcomes

      text

      Implementation feasibility | Acceptability and delivery fidelity | Depressive symptoms and IPV | Safety

      matched Text

      Depressive

   scope

   Study population or investigated outcome; not a diagnosis or efficacy claim.

depression

2

status

not-indexed

retrieval Available

false