Universal Informatics · Research reading room

Psychological interventions for common mental disorders in women experiencing intimate partner violence in low-income and middle-income countries: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Keynejad RC; Hanlon C; Howard LM · The lancet. Psychiatry · 2020 · Systematic review and meta-analysis

Original publication · Original publication · Original publication · Original publication

Recorded summary

IPV exposure did not predict a smaller treatment response. Anxiety response was larger in IPV-exposed women; differences for depression, PTSD and distress were uncertain.

Recorded limitations

These are subgroup differences in treatment effects, not direct pooled effects of therapy versus no therapy in IPV survivors. Trials were not necessarily tailored to IPV.

Evidence and provenance

Chapter Trust Factor uses a minimum of three distinct qualifying studies. Publication records retain their own evidence and assessment.

Study design and assessment
design
Systematic review and meta-analysis
assessment
category
review
is Randomized Controlled Trial
false
basis
Evidence synthesis; not a participant-randomized experiment.
sources

https://europepmc.org/article/MED/31981539 · https://api.crossref.org/works/10.1016%2Fs2215-0366%2819%2930510-3

review Scope
abstract
trust Factor
scope
Paper
status
assessed
score
1
randomized Controlled Trial
false
peer Reviewed
true
blinding
not-applicable
basis
Evidence synthesis; not a participant-randomized experiment.
sources

https://europepmc.org/article/MED/31981539 · https://api.crossref.org/works/10.1016%2Fs2215-0366%2819%2930510-3

review Scope
abstract
human Approval
false
display Crosses
1
masking Roles
participants
Not established from accessed abstract.
providers
Not established from accessed abstract.
assessors
Not established from accessed abstract.
analysts
Not established from accessed abstract.
rating Scale
library-trust-factor/1-3
jadad
status
not-applicable
score
Not recorded
evidence
evidence Type
Systematic review and meta-analysis
intervention
Psychological interventions for common mental disorders Not established from accessed abstract.
comparator
Differences in treatment response between IPV-exposed and non-exposed women
sample
15 RCTs provided subgroup data from 21 eligible trials. Outcome samples overlap.
measurement
Anxiety response modification by IPV; Depression response modification by IPV
timing
Trial-specific
trial Id
PROSPERO CRD42017078611
relationship Note
Direct evidence concerning therapeutic or psychosocial responses to IPV, with survivor and perpetrator findings kept distinct. These are subgroup differences in treatment effects, not direct pooled effects of therapy versus no therapy in IPV survivors. Trials were not necessarily tailored to IPV.
measured Genes
None recorded
pathways
None recorded
source Access
level
abstract
source URLs

https://europepmc.org/article/MED/31981539 · https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31981539/

retrieved At
2026-10-30T07:25:20.171273+00:00
outcomes
  1. name
    Anxiety response modification by IPV
    follow Up
    Trial-specific
    result
    Greater response in exposed subgroup
    effect Estimate
    Difference in SMD 0.31
    uncertainty
    95% CI 0.04 to 0.57; five interventions, n=728
    primary Status
    Not established from accessed abstract.
  2. name
    Depression response modification by IPV
    follow Up
    Trial-specific
    result
    No clear subgroup difference
    effect Estimate
    Difference in SMD 0.10
    uncertainty
    95% CI -0.04 to 0.25; 12 interventions, n=2940
    primary Status
    Not established from accessed abstract.
quality
risk Of Bias
These are subgroup differences in treatment effects, not direct pooled effects of therapy versus no therapy in IPV survivors. Trials were not necessarily tailored to IPV.
attrition
Not established from accessed abstract.
confounding
Study-design heterogeneity, overlapping trials and review-specific eligibility limit pooling across reviews.
adverse Findings
Not established from accessed abstract.
transfer Limits
These are subgroup differences in treatment effects, not direct pooled effects of therapy versus no therapy in IPV survivors. Trials were not necessarily tailored to IPV.
jadad
not applicable
masking Roles
participants
Not established from accessed abstract.
providers
Not established from accessed abstract.
assessors
Not established from accessed abstract.
analysts
Not established from accessed abstract.
population
relation
direct
population
Women with common mental disorders in LMIC trials, with measured IPV exposure
exposure Evidence
The accessed publication explicitly identifies women with common mental disorders in lmic trials, with measured ipv exposure.
rationale
Direct evidence concerning therapeutic or psychosocial responses to IPV, with survivor and perpetrator findings kept distinct.
transfer Limit
These are subgroup differences in treatment effects, not direct pooled effects of therapy versus no therapy in IPV survivors. Trials were not necessarily tailored to IPV.
Topics and recorded topic scores
  1. key
    language:domestic-family-violence
    title
    Domestic & Family Violence
    collection
    language
    trust Score
    2
Citation snapshot and identifiers
id
dv-reviews-31981539
doi
10.1016/s2215-0366(19)30510-3
pmid
31981539
citation Snapshot
count
Not recorded
source
Not recorded
retrieved At
Not recorded
status
not-assessed
citations By Collection
language
Not recorded
Complete approved library record
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-r2-3a5290fd79d9
source Content Hash
3a5290fd79d9fee3693507df5bee06133792ad30fdb3be5f9221215a04fae10c
source Access
level
abstract
source URLs

https://europepmc.org/article/MED/31981539 · https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31981539/

retrieved At
2026-10-30T07:25:20.171273+00:00
editorial Audit
auditor
Codex (AI)
completed At
2026-10-31T05:11:05.655793+00:00
prior Content Hash
644de5b26c903369de19df10e57459128fb0f906e49dbad10004e95468618293
prior Revision
r1-644de5b26c90
prior Source
frozen-120
source Verification
id
dv-reviews-31981539
doi
10.1016/s2215-0366(19)30510-3
pmid
31981539
fresh Metadata
Europe PMC core
metadata Retrieved
true
metadata SHA256
1435cb0d7843ff9dd77d3c97c35f435375209ac268b944c95b4339dc88e13212
claim Check
Headline finding/design/limitations compared with indexed abstract or accessible primary evidence; retained methods amendments separately adjudicated.
sources

https://europepmc.org/article/MED/31981539 · https://api.crossref.org/works/10.1016%2Fs2215-0366%2819%2930510-3

applied Proposals
None recorded
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 Family Id
review:31981539
family Linkage Uncertain
false
approaches
None recorded
id
dv-reviews-31981539
aliases
None recorded
title
Psychological interventions for common mental disorders in women experiencing intimate partner violence in low-income and middle-income countries: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
journal
The lancet. Psychiatry
neurotransmitters
None recorded
year
2020
authors
Keynejad RC; Hanlon C; Howard LM
design
Systematic review and meta-analysis
kind
Review
identity Conflict
Not recorded
doi
10.1016/s2215-0366(19)30510-3
pmid
31981539
urls

https://doi.org/10.1016/s2215-0366(19)30510-3 · https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31981539/ · https://europepmc.org/article/MED/31981539 · https://api.crossref.org/works/10.1016%2Fs2215-0366%2819%2930510-3

collections

language

categories

Clinical & self-report · Methods & context

targets
None recorded
priority
1
quotes
None recorded
summary
IPV exposure did not predict a smaller treatment response. Anxiety response was larger in IPV-exposed women; differences for depression, PTSD and distress were uncertain.
limitation
These are subgroup differences in treatment effects, not direct pooled effects of therapy versus no therapy in IPV survivors. Trials were not necessarily tailored to IPV.
citation Count
Not recorded
citation Snapshot
count
Not recorded
source
Not recorded
retrieved At
Not recorded
status
not-assessed
study Design Assessment
category
review
is Randomized Controlled Trial
false
basis
Evidence synthesis; not a participant-randomized experiment.
sources

https://europepmc.org/article/MED/31981539 · https://api.crossref.org/works/10.1016%2Fs2215-0366%2819%2930510-3

review Scope
abstract
paper Trust Assessment
scope
Paper
status
assessed
score
1
randomized Controlled Trial
false
peer Reviewed
true
blinding
not-applicable
basis
Evidence synthesis; not a participant-randomized experiment.
sources

https://europepmc.org/article/MED/31981539 · https://api.crossref.org/works/10.1016%2Fs2215-0366%2819%2930510-3

review Scope
abstract
human Approval
false
display Crosses
1
masking Roles
participants
Not established from accessed abstract.
providers
Not established from accessed abstract.
assessors
Not established from accessed abstract.
analysts
Not established from accessed abstract.
rating Scale
library-trust-factor/1-3
citations By Collection
language
Not recorded
topics
  1. key
    language:domestic-family-violence
    title
    Domestic & Family Violence
    collection
    language
    trust Score
    2
journal Key
lancetpsychiatry
journal Label
The lancet. Psychiatry
chapter Entries
  1. id
    language-dv-dv-reviews-31981539
    aliases
    None recorded
    title
    Psychological interventions for common mental disorders in women experiencing intimate partner violence in low-income and middle-income countries: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
    authors
    Keynejad RC; Hanlon C; Howard LM
    year
    2020
    journal
    The lancet. Psychiatry
    doi
    10.1016/s2215-0366(19)30510-3
    pmid
    31981539
    urls

    https://doi.org/10.1016/s2215-0366(19)30510-3 · https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31981539/ · https://europepmc.org/article/MED/31981539 · https://api.crossref.org/works/10.1016%2Fs2215-0366%2819%2930510-3

    collections

    language

    categories

    Clinical & self-report · Methods & context

    targets
    None recorded
    neurotransmitters
    None recorded
    conditions

    anxiety · depression

    condition Evidence
    1. id
      anxiety
      evidence
      1. field
        outcomes
        text
        Anxiety response modification by IPV | Depression response modification by IPV
        matched Text
        Anxiety
      scope
      Study population or investigated outcome; not a diagnosis or efficacy claim.
    2. id
      depression
      evidence
      1. field
        outcomes
        text
        Anxiety response modification by IPV | Depression response modification by IPV
        matched Text
        Depression
      scope
      Study population or investigated outcome; not a diagnosis or efficacy claim.
    age Groups

    adults

    age Population
    record Id
    dv-reviews-31981539
    collections

    language

    groups

    adults

    reported Ages
    Not established from accessed abstract.
    youth Scope
    Not recorded
    youth Source Note
    Not recorded
    source URL
    https://europepmc.org/article/MED/31981539
    basis Type
    source-limited-ai-editorial-assessment
    classification Note
    Original age terms: adults. Programme targets or possible eligibility are not counted as observed ages.
    community Matches
    1. category Id
      domestic-violence
      relation
      direct
    kind
    Review
    design
    Systematic review and meta-analysis
    origin
    approved-dv-20261101
    priority
    1
    quotes
    None recorded
    finding
    IPV exposure did not predict a smaller treatment response. Anxiety response was larger in IPV-exposed women; differences for depression, PTSD and distress were uncertain.
    summary
    IPV exposure did not predict a smaller treatment response. Anxiety response was larger in IPV-exposed women; differences for depression, PTSD and distress were uncertain.
    limitation
    These are subgroup differences in treatment effects, not direct pooled effects of therapy versus no therapy in IPV survivors. Trials were not necessarily tailored to IPV.
    evidence
    evidence Type
    Systematic review and meta-analysis
    intervention
    Psychological interventions for common mental disorders Not established from accessed abstract.
    comparator
    Differences in treatment response between IPV-exposed and non-exposed women
    sample
    15 RCTs provided subgroup data from 21 eligible trials. Outcome samples overlap.
    measurement
    Anxiety response modification by IPV; Depression response modification by IPV
    timing
    Trial-specific
    trial Id
    PROSPERO CRD42017078611
    relationship Note
    Direct evidence concerning therapeutic or psychosocial responses to IPV, with survivor and perpetrator findings kept distinct. These are subgroup differences in treatment effects, not direct pooled effects of therapy versus no therapy in IPV survivors. Trials were not necessarily tailored to IPV.
    measured Genes
    None recorded
    pathways
    None recorded
    source Access
    level
    abstract
    source URLs

    https://europepmc.org/article/MED/31981539 · https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31981539/

    retrieved At
    2026-10-30T07:25:20.171273+00:00
    outcomes
    1. name
      Anxiety response modification by IPV
      follow Up
      Trial-specific
      result
      Greater response in exposed subgroup
      effect Estimate
      Difference in SMD 0.31
      uncertainty
      95% CI 0.04 to 0.57; five interventions, n=728
      primary Status
      Not established from accessed abstract.
    2. name
      Depression response modification by IPV
      follow Up
      Trial-specific
      result
      No clear subgroup difference
      effect Estimate
      Difference in SMD 0.10
      uncertainty
      95% CI -0.04 to 0.25; 12 interventions, n=2940
      primary Status
      Not established from accessed abstract.
    quality
    risk Of Bias
    These are subgroup differences in treatment effects, not direct pooled effects of therapy versus no therapy in IPV survivors. Trials were not necessarily tailored to IPV.
    attrition
    Not established from accessed abstract.
    confounding
    Study-design heterogeneity, overlapping trials and review-specific eligibility limit pooling across reviews.
    adverse Findings
    Not established from accessed abstract.
    transfer Limits
    These are subgroup differences in treatment effects, not direct pooled effects of therapy versus no therapy in IPV survivors. Trials were not necessarily tailored to IPV.
    jadad
    not applicable
    masking Roles
    participants
    Not established from accessed abstract.
    providers
    Not established from accessed abstract.
    assessors
    Not established from accessed abstract.
    analysts
    Not established from accessed abstract.
    population
    relation
    direct
    population
    Women with common mental disorders in LMIC trials, with measured IPV exposure
    exposure Evidence
    The accessed publication explicitly identifies women with common mental disorders in lmic trials, with measured ipv exposure.
    rationale
    Direct evidence concerning therapeutic or psychosocial responses to IPV, with survivor and perpetrator findings kept distinct.
    transfer Limit
    These are subgroup differences in treatment effects, not direct pooled effects of therapy versus no therapy in IPV survivors. Trials were not necessarily tailored to IPV.
    study Design Assessment
    category
    review
    is Randomized Controlled Trial
    false
    basis
    Evidence synthesis; not a participant-randomized experiment.
    sources

    https://europepmc.org/article/MED/31981539 · https://api.crossref.org/works/10.1016%2Fs2215-0366%2819%2930510-3

    review Scope
    abstract
    paper Trust Assessment
    scope
    Paper
    status
    assessed
    score
    1
    randomized Controlled Trial
    false
    peer Reviewed
    true
    blinding
    not-applicable
    basis
    Evidence synthesis; not a participant-randomized experiment.
    sources

    https://europepmc.org/article/MED/31981539 · https://api.crossref.org/works/10.1016%2Fs2215-0366%2819%2930510-3

    review Scope
    abstract
    human Approval
    false
    display Crosses
    1
    masking Roles
    participants
    Not established from accessed abstract.
    providers
    Not established from accessed abstract.
    assessors
    Not established from accessed abstract.
    analysts
    Not established from accessed abstract.
    rating Scale
    library-trust-factor/1-3
    jadad
    status
    not-applicable
    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-r2-3a5290fd79d9
    source Content Hash
    3a5290fd79d9fee3693507df5bee06133792ad30fdb3be5f9221215a04fae10c
    source Access
    level
    abstract
    source URLs

    https://europepmc.org/article/MED/31981539 · https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31981539/

    retrieved At
    2026-10-30T07:25:20.171273+00:00
    study Family Id
    review:31981539
    family Linkage Uncertain
    false
    approaches
    None recorded
    record Id
    dv-reviews-31981539
    source Pages
    None recorded
    editorial Audit
    auditor
    Codex (AI)
    completed At
    2026-10-31T05:11:05.655793+00:00
    prior Content Hash
    644de5b26c903369de19df10e57459128fb0f906e49dbad10004e95468618293
    prior Revision
    r1-644de5b26c90
    prior Source
    frozen-120
    source Verification
    id
    dv-reviews-31981539
    doi
    10.1016/s2215-0366(19)30510-3
    pmid
    31981539
    fresh Metadata
    Europe PMC core
    metadata Retrieved
    true
    metadata SHA256
    1435cb0d7843ff9dd77d3c97c35f435375209ac268b944c95b4339dc88e13212
    claim Check
    Headline finding/design/limitations compared with indexed abstract or accessible primary evidence; retained methods amendments separately adjudicated.
    sources

    https://europepmc.org/article/MED/31981539 · https://api.crossref.org/works/10.1016%2Fs2215-0366%2819%2930510-3

    applied Proposals
    None recorded
    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-reviews-31981539
    title
    Psychological interventions for common mental disorders in women experiencing intimate partner violence in low-income and middle-income countries: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
    authors

    Keynejad RC · Hanlon C · Howard LM

    year
    2020
    journal
    The lancet. Psychiatry
    doi
    10.1016/s2215-0366(19)30510-3
    pmid
    31981539
    trial Registration

    PROSPERO CRD42017078611

    collection
    language
    intervention Family
    Psychological interventions for common mental disorders
    publication Type
    Systematic review and meta-analysis
    study Family Id
    review:31981539
    family Linkage Uncertain
    false
    independent Primary Study
    false
    existing Repository Matches
    None recorded
    relevance
    relation
    direct
    population
    Women with common mental disorders in LMIC trials, with measured IPV exposure
    exposure Evidence
    The accessed publication explicitly identifies women with common mental disorders in lmic trials, with measured ipv exposure.
    rationale
    Direct evidence concerning therapeutic or psychosocial responses to IPV, with survivor and perpetrator findings kept distinct.
    transfer Limit
    These are subgroup differences in treatment effects, not direct pooled effects of therapy versus no therapy in IPV survivors. Trials were not necessarily tailored to IPV.
    age
    groups

    adults

    reported Range
    Not established from accessed abstract.
    youth Scope
    Not recorded
    country
    Low- and middle-income countries; exact distribution not extracted.
    setting
    Multiple study settings; distribution not established from abstract.
    sample Size
    randomized
    Not recorded
    analyzed
    Not recorded
    description
    15 RCTs provided subgroup data from 21 eligible trials. Outcome samples overlap.
    intervention
    description
    Psychological interventions for common mental disorders
    dose
    Not established from accessed abstract.
    provider
    Not established from accessed abstract.
    comparator
    Differences in treatment response between IPV-exposed and non-exposed women
    outcomes
    1. name
      Anxiety response modification by IPV
      follow Up
      Trial-specific
      result
      Greater response in exposed subgroup
      effect Estimate
      Difference in SMD 0.31
      uncertainty
      95% CI 0.04 to 0.57; five interventions, n=728
      primary Status
      Not established from accessed abstract.
    2. name
      Depression response modification by IPV
      follow Up
      Trial-specific
      result
      No clear subgroup difference
      effect Estimate
      Difference in SMD 0.10
      uncertainty
      95% CI -0.04 to 0.25; 12 interventions, n=2940
      primary Status
      Not established from accessed abstract.
    finding
    IPV exposure did not predict a smaller treatment response. Anxiety response was larger in IPV-exposed women; differences for depression, PTSD and distress were uncertain.
    limitation
    These are subgroup differences in treatment effects, not direct pooled effects of therapy versus no therapy in IPV survivors. Trials were not necessarily tailored to IPV.
    design
    type
    Systematic review and meta-analysis
    randomization Evidence
    Evidence synthesis; not a participant-randomized experiment.
    masking
    participants
    Not established from accessed abstract.
    providers
    Not established from accessed abstract.
    assessors
    Not established from accessed abstract.
    analysts
    Not established from accessed abstract.
    crosses
    0
    cross Rationale
    Evidence synthesis receives no trial-design crosses.
    quality
    risk Of Bias
    These are subgroup differences in treatment effects, not direct pooled effects of therapy versus no therapy in IPV survivors. Trials were not necessarily tailored to IPV.
    attrition
    Not established from accessed abstract.
    confounding
    Study-design heterogeneity, overlapping trials and review-specific eligibility limit pooling across reviews.
    adverse Findings
    Not established from accessed abstract.
    transfer Limits
    These are subgroup differences in treatment effects, not direct pooled effects of therapy versus no therapy in IPV survivors. Trials were not necessarily tailored to IPV.
    jadad
    not applicable
    access
    level
    abstract
    source URLs

    https://europepmc.org/article/MED/31981539 · https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31981539/

    retrieved At
    2026-10-30T07:25:20.171273+00:00
    sources
    1. url
      https://europepmc.org/article/MED/31981539
      type
      Europe PMC indexed publication metadata and abstract
      retrieved At
      2026-10-30T07:25:20.171273+00:00
      identity Verified
      true
      notes
      PMID, DOI, title, journal and authors reconciled within the indexed source; full-text appraisal not claimed.
    2. url
      https://api.crossref.org/works/10.1016%2Fs2215-0366%2819%2930510-3
      type
      Crossref publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata
      retrieved At
      2026-10-30T07:26:03.906938+00:00
      identity Verified
      true
      notes
      DOI and normalized title match the Europe PMC record. Bibliographic verification only; not a full-text review.
    publication Status
    status
    Published journal article
    correction Retraction Check
    Europe PMC publication types and Crossref relation/update metadata checked. No retraction indicator found in these records.
    uncertainty
    Metadata checks do not guarantee absence of all notices or later changes.
    recommendation Rationale
    Clarifies whether IPV exposure changes psychological-treatment response among women with common mental disorders in LMICs; subgroup contrasts are kept separate from direct efficacy estimates.
    review
    status
    pending
    reviewer
    Not recorded
    assessment Status
    assessed
    assessment Notes
    Abstract-level structured assessment; missing fields are explicit. Review evidence is not counted as additional independent trials.
    identity Verification
    status
    cross-source-verified
    fields

    DOI · title

    limitation
    Not recorded
    source Evidence Hashes
    crossref SHA256
    863361d1ec3cfdfdb7c9d8016117c066fe25d4a96e3a89a624a7bcfc23dbbc7c
    review Readiness
    ai-editorial-audit-complete-release-pending
    review Ready
    true
    research Lane
    reviews-prevention
    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
    644de5b26c903369de19df10e57459128fb0f906e49dbad10004e95468618293
    prior Revision
    r1-644de5b26c90
    prior Source
    frozen-120
    source Verification
    id
    dv-reviews-31981539
    doi
    10.1016/s2215-0366(19)30510-3
    pmid
    31981539
    fresh Metadata
    Europe PMC core
    metadata Retrieved
    true
    metadata SHA256
    1435cb0d7843ff9dd77d3c97c35f435375209ac268b944c95b4339dc88e13212
    claim Check
    Headline finding/design/limitations compared with indexed abstract or accessible primary evidence; retained methods amendments separately adjudicated.
    sources

    https://europepmc.org/article/MED/31981539 · https://api.crossref.org/works/10.1016%2Fs2215-0366%2819%2930510-3

    applied Proposals
    None recorded
    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
    review
    is Randomized Controlled Trial
    false
    basis
    Evidence synthesis; not a participant-randomized experiment.
    sources

    https://europepmc.org/article/MED/31981539 · https://api.crossref.org/works/10.1016%2Fs2215-0366%2819%2930510-3

    review Scope
    abstract
    paper Trust Assessment
    scope
    Paper
    status
    assessed
    score
    1
    randomized Controlled Trial
    false
    peer Reviewed
    true
    blinding
    not-applicable
    basis
    Evidence synthesis receives no trial-design crosses.
    sources

    https://europepmc.org/article/MED/31981539 · https://api.crossref.org/works/10.1016%2Fs2215-0366%2819%2930510-3

    review Scope
    abstract
    human Approval
    false
    display Crosses
    0
    masking Roles
    participants
    Not established from accessed abstract.
    providers
    Not established from accessed abstract.
    assessors
    Not established from accessed abstract.
    analysts
    Not established from accessed abstract.
    jadad
    status
    not-applicable
    score
    Not recorded
    evidence
    population
    relation
    direct
    population
    Women with common mental disorders in LMIC trials, with measured IPV exposure
    exposure Evidence
    The accessed publication explicitly identifies women with common mental disorders in lmic trials, with measured ipv exposure.
    rationale
    Direct evidence concerning therapeutic or psychosocial responses to IPV, with survivor and perpetrator findings kept distinct.
    transfer Limit
    These are subgroup differences in treatment effects, not direct pooled effects of therapy versus no therapy in IPV survivors. Trials were not necessarily tailored to IPV.
    intervention
    description
    Psychological interventions for common mental disorders
    dose
    Not established from accessed abstract.
    provider
    Not established from accessed abstract.
    comparator
    Differences in treatment response between IPV-exposed and non-exposed women
    outcomes
    1. name
      Anxiety response modification by IPV
      follow Up
      Trial-specific
      result
      Greater response in exposed subgroup
      effect Estimate
      Difference in SMD 0.31
      uncertainty
      95% CI 0.04 to 0.57; five interventions, n=728
      primary Status
      Not established from accessed abstract.
    2. name
      Depression response modification by IPV
      follow Up
      Trial-specific
      result
      No clear subgroup difference
      effect Estimate
      Difference in SMD 0.10
      uncertainty
      95% CI -0.04 to 0.25; 12 interventions, n=2940
      primary Status
      Not established from accessed abstract.
    access
    level
    abstract
    source URLs

    https://europepmc.org/article/MED/31981539 · https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31981539/

    retrieved At
    2026-10-30T07:25:20.171273+00:00
    citation Snapshot
    count
    Not recorded
    source
    Not recorded
    retrieved At
    Not recorded
    status
    not-assessed
    provenance
    Discovered by AI
    content Hash
    3a5290fd79d9fee3693507df5bee06133792ad30fdb3be5f9221215a04fae10c
    revision
    audit-r2-3a5290fd79d9
    archive Entries
    None recorded
    collection
    language
    chapter Number
    5
    topic Id
    domestic-family-violence
    topic Title
    Domestic & Family Violence
    trust Score
    2
evidence
evidence Type
Systematic review and meta-analysis
intervention
Psychological interventions for common mental disorders Not established from accessed abstract.
comparator
Differences in treatment response between IPV-exposed and non-exposed women
sample
15 RCTs provided subgroup data from 21 eligible trials. Outcome samples overlap.
measurement
Anxiety response modification by IPV; Depression response modification by IPV
timing
Trial-specific
trial Id
PROSPERO CRD42017078611
relationship Note
Direct evidence concerning therapeutic or psychosocial responses to IPV, with survivor and perpetrator findings kept distinct. These are subgroup differences in treatment effects, not direct pooled effects of therapy versus no therapy in IPV survivors. Trials were not necessarily tailored to IPV.
measured Genes
None recorded
pathways
None recorded
source Access
level
abstract
source URLs

https://europepmc.org/article/MED/31981539 · https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31981539/

retrieved At
2026-10-30T07:25:20.171273+00:00
outcomes
  1. name
    Anxiety response modification by IPV
    follow Up
    Trial-specific
    result
    Greater response in exposed subgroup
    effect Estimate
    Difference in SMD 0.31
    uncertainty
    95% CI 0.04 to 0.57; five interventions, n=728
    primary Status
    Not established from accessed abstract.
  2. name
    Depression response modification by IPV
    follow Up
    Trial-specific
    result
    No clear subgroup difference
    effect Estimate
    Difference in SMD 0.10
    uncertainty
    95% CI -0.04 to 0.25; 12 interventions, n=2940
    primary Status
    Not established from accessed abstract.
quality
risk Of Bias
These are subgroup differences in treatment effects, not direct pooled effects of therapy versus no therapy in IPV survivors. Trials were not necessarily tailored to IPV.
attrition
Not established from accessed abstract.
confounding
Study-design heterogeneity, overlapping trials and review-specific eligibility limit pooling across reviews.
adverse Findings
Not established from accessed abstract.
transfer Limits
These are subgroup differences in treatment effects, not direct pooled effects of therapy versus no therapy in IPV survivors. Trials were not necessarily tailored to IPV.
jadad
not applicable
masking Roles
participants
Not established from accessed abstract.
providers
Not established from accessed abstract.
assessors
Not established from accessed abstract.
analysts
Not established from accessed abstract.
population
relation
direct
population
Women with common mental disorders in LMIC trials, with measured IPV exposure
exposure Evidence
The accessed publication explicitly identifies women with common mental disorders in lmic trials, with measured ipv exposure.
rationale
Direct evidence concerning therapeutic or psychosocial responses to IPV, with survivor and perpetrator findings kept distinct.
transfer Limit
These are subgroup differences in treatment effects, not direct pooled effects of therapy versus no therapy in IPV survivors. Trials were not necessarily tailored to IPV.
jadad
status
not-applicable
score
Not recorded
condition Evidence
  1. id
    anxiety
    evidence
    1. field
      outcomes
      text
      Anxiety response modification by IPV | Depression response modification by IPV
      matched Text
      Anxiety
    scope
    Study population or investigated outcome; not a diagnosis or efficacy claim.
  2. id
    depression
    evidence
    1. field
      outcomes
      text
      Anxiety response modification by IPV | Depression response modification by IPV
      matched Text
      Depression
    scope
    Study population or investigated outcome; not a diagnosis or efficacy claim.
conditions

anxiety · depression

topic Trust Scores

2

full Text
status
not-indexed
retrieval Available
false

Open this publication in the interactive library