Universal Informatics · Research reading room

Psychological therapies for women who experience intimate partner violence.

Hameed M; O'Doherty L; Gilchrist G; Tirado-Muñoz J; Taft A; Chondros P; Feder G; Tan M; Hegarty K · The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2020 · Systematic review and meta-analysis

Original publication · Original publication · Original publication · Original publication

Recorded summary

Therapies probably modestly reduced depression at medium-term follow-up; evidence for PTSD, safety planning and repeat IPV remained uncertain.

Recorded limitations

Allocation concealment was adequately described in only 12 trials. Harms were poorly measured; dropout similarity is not proof of no harm.

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/32608505 · https://api.crossref.org/works/10.1002%2F14651858.cd013017.pub2

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/32608505 · https://api.crossref.org/works/10.1002%2F14651858.cd013017.pub2

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 therapies targeting cognition, motivation and behaviour Two to 50 sessions across trials
comparator
Usual care, no treatment, delayed or minimal interventions
sample
33 trials; 5517 women
measurement
Depression; PTSD; Repeat IPV
timing
Six to under12 months
trial Id
relationship Note
Direct evidence concerning therapeutic or psychosocial responses to IPV, with survivor and perpetrator findings kept distinct. Allocation concealment was adequately described in only 12 trials. Harms were poorly measured; dropout similarity is not proof of no harm.
measured Genes
None recorded
pathways
None recorded
source Access
level
abstract
source URLs

https://europepmc.org/article/MED/32608505 · https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32608505/

retrieved At
2026-10-30T07:25:20.171273+00:00
outcomes
  1. name
    Depression
    follow Up
    Six to under12 months
    result
    Probable modest benefit
    effect Estimate
    SMD -0.24
    uncertainty
    95% CI -0.47 to -0.01; four trials,600 women; moderate certainty
    primary Status
    Primary review outcome
  2. name
    PTSD
    follow Up
    Six to under12 months
    result
    No clear effect
    effect Estimate
    SMD -0.24
    uncertainty
    95% CI -0.54 to 0.06; low certainty
    primary Status
    Secondary review outcome
  3. name
    Repeat IPV
    follow Up
    Six to under12 months
    result
    No clear effect
    effect Estimate
    SMD 0.03
    uncertainty
    95% CI -0.14 to 0.20; low certainty
    primary Status
    Secondary review outcome
quality
risk Of Bias
Allocation concealment was adequately described in only 12 trials. Harms were poorly measured; dropout similarity is not proof of no harm.
attrition
Not established from accessed abstract.
confounding
Study-design heterogeneity, overlapping trials and review-specific eligibility limit pooling across reviews.
adverse Findings
Only one trial measured harm with a validated scale; no reported adverse events does not establish absence of harm.
transfer Limits
Allocation concealment was adequately described in only 12 trials. Harms were poorly measured; dropout similarity is not proof of no harm.
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 aged 16 or older reporting recent or lifetime IPV
exposure Evidence
The accessed publication explicitly identifies women aged 16 or older reporting recent or lifetime ipv.
rationale
Direct evidence concerning therapeutic or psychosocial responses to IPV, with survivor and perpetrator findings kept distinct.
transfer Limit
Allocation concealment was adequately described in only 12 trials. Harms were poorly measured; dropout similarity is not proof of no harm.
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-32608505
doi
10.1002/14651858.cd013017.pub2
pmid
32608505
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-r2-6bd3e8beecb0
source Content Hash
6bd3e8beecb0c62bcba92efa8b1a3b546a5b1b354e5bd6e53e87ed806315d043
source Access
level
abstract
source URLs

https://europepmc.org/article/MED/32608505 · https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32608505/

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
96c3f9a32fde976afa45eb7f826e6fbcdee110f67742612fad115f816fe45bd9
prior Revision
r1-96c3f9a32fde
prior Source
frozen-120
source Verification
id
dv-reviews-32608505
doi
10.1002/14651858.cd013017.pub2
pmid
32608505
fresh Metadata
Europe PMC core
metadata Retrieved
true
metadata SHA256
13a912efcf082c3fccd4a9c9ff8685bf43482bfe4873a9c19e9b5221b376cc73
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/32608505 · https://api.crossref.org/works/10.1002%2F14651858.cd013017.pub2

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:32608505
family Linkage Uncertain
false
approaches
None recorded
id
dv-reviews-32608505
aliases
None recorded
title
Psychological therapies for women who experience intimate partner violence.
journal
The Cochrane database of systematic reviews
neurotransmitters
None recorded
year
2020
authors
Hameed M; O'Doherty L; Gilchrist G; Tirado-Muñoz J; Taft A; Chondros P; Feder G; Tan M; Hegarty K
design
Systematic review and meta-analysis
kind
Review
identity Conflict
Not recorded
doi
10.1002/14651858.cd013017.pub2
pmid
32608505
urls

https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.cd013017.pub2 · https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32608505/ · https://europepmc.org/article/MED/32608505 · https://api.crossref.org/works/10.1002%2F14651858.cd013017.pub2

collections

language

categories

Clinical & self-report · Methods & context

targets
None recorded
priority
1
quotes
None recorded
summary
Therapies probably modestly reduced depression at medium-term follow-up; evidence for PTSD, safety planning and repeat IPV remained uncertain.
limitation
Allocation concealment was adequately described in only 12 trials. Harms were poorly measured; dropout similarity is not proof of no harm.
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/32608505 · https://api.crossref.org/works/10.1002%2F14651858.cd013017.pub2

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/32608505 · https://api.crossref.org/works/10.1002%2F14651858.cd013017.pub2

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
cochranedatabaseofsystematicreviews
journal Label
The Cochrane database of systematic reviews
chapter Entries
  1. id
    language-dv-dv-reviews-32608505
    aliases
    None recorded
    title
    Psychological therapies for women who experience intimate partner violence.
    authors
    Hameed M; O'Doherty L; Gilchrist G; Tirado-Muñoz J; Taft A; Chondros P; Feder G; Tan M; Hegarty K
    year
    2020
    journal
    The Cochrane database of systematic reviews
    doi
    10.1002/14651858.cd013017.pub2
    pmid
    32608505
    urls

    https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.cd013017.pub2 · https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32608505/ · https://europepmc.org/article/MED/32608505 · https://api.crossref.org/works/10.1002%2F14651858.cd013017.pub2

    collections

    language

    categories

    Clinical & self-report · Methods & context

    targets
    None recorded
    neurotransmitters
    None recorded
    conditions

    ptsd · depression

    condition Evidence
    1. id
      ptsd
      evidence
      1. field
        outcomes
        text
        Depression | PTSD | Repeat IPV
        matched Text
        PTSD
      scope
      Study population or investigated outcome; not a diagnosis or efficacy claim.
    2. id
      depression
      evidence
      1. field
        outcomes
        text
        Depression | PTSD | Repeat IPV
        matched Text
        Depression
      scope
      Study population or investigated outcome; not a diagnosis or efficacy claim.
    age Groups

    adolescents · youth · adults

    age Population
    record Id
    dv-reviews-32608505
    collections

    language

    groups

    adolescents · youth · adults

    reported Ages
    Eligibility age 16 and older; mean participant age 37 years
    youth Scope
    included
    youth Source Note
    included
    source URL
    https://europepmc.org/article/MED/32608505
    basis Type
    source-limited-ai-editorial-assessment
    classification Note
    Original age terms: adolescents, youth, 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
    Therapies probably modestly reduced depression at medium-term follow-up; evidence for PTSD, safety planning and repeat IPV remained uncertain.
    summary
    Therapies probably modestly reduced depression at medium-term follow-up; evidence for PTSD, safety planning and repeat IPV remained uncertain.
    limitation
    Allocation concealment was adequately described in only 12 trials. Harms were poorly measured; dropout similarity is not proof of no harm.
    evidence
    evidence Type
    Systematic review and meta-analysis
    intervention
    Psychological therapies targeting cognition, motivation and behaviour Two to 50 sessions across trials
    comparator
    Usual care, no treatment, delayed or minimal interventions
    sample
    33 trials; 5517 women
    measurement
    Depression; PTSD; Repeat IPV
    timing
    Six to under12 months
    trial Id
    relationship Note
    Direct evidence concerning therapeutic or psychosocial responses to IPV, with survivor and perpetrator findings kept distinct. Allocation concealment was adequately described in only 12 trials. Harms were poorly measured; dropout similarity is not proof of no harm.
    measured Genes
    None recorded
    pathways
    None recorded
    source Access
    level
    abstract
    source URLs

    https://europepmc.org/article/MED/32608505 · https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32608505/

    retrieved At
    2026-10-30T07:25:20.171273+00:00
    outcomes
    1. name
      Depression
      follow Up
      Six to under12 months
      result
      Probable modest benefit
      effect Estimate
      SMD -0.24
      uncertainty
      95% CI -0.47 to -0.01; four trials,600 women; moderate certainty
      primary Status
      Primary review outcome
    2. name
      PTSD
      follow Up
      Six to under12 months
      result
      No clear effect
      effect Estimate
      SMD -0.24
      uncertainty
      95% CI -0.54 to 0.06; low certainty
      primary Status
      Secondary review outcome
    3. name
      Repeat IPV
      follow Up
      Six to under12 months
      result
      No clear effect
      effect Estimate
      SMD 0.03
      uncertainty
      95% CI -0.14 to 0.20; low certainty
      primary Status
      Secondary review outcome
    quality
    risk Of Bias
    Allocation concealment was adequately described in only 12 trials. Harms were poorly measured; dropout similarity is not proof of no harm.
    attrition
    Not established from accessed abstract.
    confounding
    Study-design heterogeneity, overlapping trials and review-specific eligibility limit pooling across reviews.
    adverse Findings
    Only one trial measured harm with a validated scale; no reported adverse events does not establish absence of harm.
    transfer Limits
    Allocation concealment was adequately described in only 12 trials. Harms were poorly measured; dropout similarity is not proof of no harm.
    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 aged 16 or older reporting recent or lifetime IPV
    exposure Evidence
    The accessed publication explicitly identifies women aged 16 or older reporting recent or lifetime ipv.
    rationale
    Direct evidence concerning therapeutic or psychosocial responses to IPV, with survivor and perpetrator findings kept distinct.
    transfer Limit
    Allocation concealment was adequately described in only 12 trials. Harms were poorly measured; dropout similarity is not proof of no harm.
    study Design Assessment
    category
    review
    is Randomized Controlled Trial
    false
    basis
    Evidence synthesis; not a participant-randomized experiment.
    sources

    https://europepmc.org/article/MED/32608505 · https://api.crossref.org/works/10.1002%2F14651858.cd013017.pub2

    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/32608505 · https://api.crossref.org/works/10.1002%2F14651858.cd013017.pub2

    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-r2-6bd3e8beecb0
    source Content Hash
    6bd3e8beecb0c62bcba92efa8b1a3b546a5b1b354e5bd6e53e87ed806315d043
    source Access
    level
    abstract
    source URLs

    https://europepmc.org/article/MED/32608505 · https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32608505/

    retrieved At
    2026-10-30T07:25:20.171273+00:00
    study Family Id
    review:32608505
    family Linkage Uncertain
    false
    approaches
    None recorded
    record Id
    dv-reviews-32608505
    source Pages
    None recorded
    editorial Audit
    auditor
    Codex (AI)
    completed At
    2026-10-31T05:11:05.655793+00:00
    prior Content Hash
    96c3f9a32fde976afa45eb7f826e6fbcdee110f67742612fad115f816fe45bd9
    prior Revision
    r1-96c3f9a32fde
    prior Source
    frozen-120
    source Verification
    id
    dv-reviews-32608505
    doi
    10.1002/14651858.cd013017.pub2
    pmid
    32608505
    fresh Metadata
    Europe PMC core
    metadata Retrieved
    true
    metadata SHA256
    13a912efcf082c3fccd4a9c9ff8685bf43482bfe4873a9c19e9b5221b376cc73
    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/32608505 · https://api.crossref.org/works/10.1002%2F14651858.cd013017.pub2

    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-32608505
    title
    Psychological therapies for women who experience intimate partner violence.
    authors

    Hameed M · O'Doherty L · Gilchrist G · Tirado-Muñoz J · Taft A · Chondros P · Feder G · Tan M · Hegarty K

    year
    2020
    journal
    The Cochrane database of systematic reviews
    doi
    10.1002/14651858.cd013017.pub2
    pmid
    32608505
    trial Registration
    None recorded
    collection
    language
    intervention Family
    Psychological therapies targeting cognition, motivation and behaviour
    publication Type
    Systematic review and meta-analysis
    study Family Id
    review:32608505
    family Linkage Uncertain
    false
    independent Primary Study
    false
    existing Repository Matches
    None recorded
    relevance
    relation
    direct
    population
    Women aged 16 or older reporting recent or lifetime IPV
    exposure Evidence
    The accessed publication explicitly identifies women aged 16 or older reporting recent or lifetime ipv.
    rationale
    Direct evidence concerning therapeutic or psychosocial responses to IPV, with survivor and perpetrator findings kept distinct.
    transfer Limit
    Allocation concealment was adequately described in only 12 trials. Harms were poorly measured; dropout similarity is not proof of no harm.
    age
    groups

    adolescents · youth · adults

    reported Range
    Eligibility age 16 and older; mean participant age 37 years
    youth Scope
    included
    country
    Not established from accessed abstract.
    setting
    Multiple study settings; distribution not established from abstract.
    sample Size
    randomized
    Not recorded
    analyzed
    Not recorded
    description
    33 trials; 5517 women
    intervention
    description
    Psychological therapies targeting cognition, motivation and behaviour
    dose
    Two to 50 sessions across trials
    provider
    Not established from accessed abstract.
    comparator
    Usual care, no treatment, delayed or minimal interventions
    outcomes
    1. name
      Depression
      follow Up
      Six to under12 months
      result
      Probable modest benefit
      effect Estimate
      SMD -0.24
      uncertainty
      95% CI -0.47 to -0.01; four trials,600 women; moderate certainty
      primary Status
      Primary review outcome
    2. name
      PTSD
      follow Up
      Six to under12 months
      result
      No clear effect
      effect Estimate
      SMD -0.24
      uncertainty
      95% CI -0.54 to 0.06; low certainty
      primary Status
      Secondary review outcome
    3. name
      Repeat IPV
      follow Up
      Six to under12 months
      result
      No clear effect
      effect Estimate
      SMD 0.03
      uncertainty
      95% CI -0.14 to 0.20; low certainty
      primary Status
      Secondary review outcome
    finding
    Therapies probably modestly reduced depression at medium-term follow-up; evidence for PTSD, safety planning and repeat IPV remained uncertain.
    limitation
    Allocation concealment was adequately described in only 12 trials. Harms were poorly measured; dropout similarity is not proof of no harm.
    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
    Allocation concealment was adequately described in only 12 trials. Harms were poorly measured; dropout similarity is not proof of no harm.
    attrition
    Not established from accessed abstract.
    confounding
    Study-design heterogeneity, overlapping trials and review-specific eligibility limit pooling across reviews.
    adverse Findings
    Only one trial measured harm with a validated scale; no reported adverse events does not establish absence of harm.
    transfer Limits
    Allocation concealment was adequately described in only 12 trials. Harms were poorly measured; dropout similarity is not proof of no harm.
    jadad
    not applicable
    access
    level
    abstract
    source URLs

    https://europepmc.org/article/MED/32608505 · https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32608505/

    retrieved At
    2026-10-30T07:25:20.171273+00:00
    sources
    1. url
      https://europepmc.org/article/MED/32608505
      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/10.1002%2F14651858.cd013017.pub2
      type
      Crossref publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata
      retrieved At
      2026-10-30T07:26:08.932086+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.
    version Links
    1. DOI
      10.1002/14651858.cd013017
      type
      new_version
      label
      New version
      source
      publisher
      updated
      date-parts

      1. 2020 · 7 · 1

      date-time
      2020-07-01T00:00:00Z
      timestamp
      1593561600000
    recommendation Rationale
    Provides a Cochrane synthesis of psychological therapies for women experiencing IPV, including modest depression benefit and uncertain PTSD, repeat-IPV and harm outcomes.
    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
    5f4805632f141aaf00943682ea225cdd573bbe10a86479e3dc9332d1a06e99b7
    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
    96c3f9a32fde976afa45eb7f826e6fbcdee110f67742612fad115f816fe45bd9
    prior Revision
    r1-96c3f9a32fde
    prior Source
    frozen-120
    source Verification
    id
    dv-reviews-32608505
    doi
    10.1002/14651858.cd013017.pub2
    pmid
    32608505
    fresh Metadata
    Europe PMC core
    metadata Retrieved
    true
    metadata SHA256
    13a912efcf082c3fccd4a9c9ff8685bf43482bfe4873a9c19e9b5221b376cc73
    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/32608505 · https://api.crossref.org/works/10.1002%2F14651858.cd013017.pub2

    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/32608505 · https://api.crossref.org/works/10.1002%2F14651858.cd013017.pub2

    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/32608505 · https://api.crossref.org/works/10.1002%2F14651858.cd013017.pub2

    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 aged 16 or older reporting recent or lifetime IPV
    exposure Evidence
    The accessed publication explicitly identifies women aged 16 or older reporting recent or lifetime ipv.
    rationale
    Direct evidence concerning therapeutic or psychosocial responses to IPV, with survivor and perpetrator findings kept distinct.
    transfer Limit
    Allocation concealment was adequately described in only 12 trials. Harms were poorly measured; dropout similarity is not proof of no harm.
    intervention
    description
    Psychological therapies targeting cognition, motivation and behaviour
    dose
    Two to 50 sessions across trials
    provider
    Not established from accessed abstract.
    comparator
    Usual care, no treatment, delayed or minimal interventions
    outcomes
    1. name
      Depression
      follow Up
      Six to under12 months
      result
      Probable modest benefit
      effect Estimate
      SMD -0.24
      uncertainty
      95% CI -0.47 to -0.01; four trials,600 women; moderate certainty
      primary Status
      Primary review outcome
    2. name
      PTSD
      follow Up
      Six to under12 months
      result
      No clear effect
      effect Estimate
      SMD -0.24
      uncertainty
      95% CI -0.54 to 0.06; low certainty
      primary Status
      Secondary review outcome
    3. name
      Repeat IPV
      follow Up
      Six to under12 months
      result
      No clear effect
      effect Estimate
      SMD 0.03
      uncertainty
      95% CI -0.14 to 0.20; low certainty
      primary Status
      Secondary review outcome
    access
    level
    abstract
    source URLs

    https://europepmc.org/article/MED/32608505 · https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32608505/

    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
    6bd3e8beecb0c62bcba92efa8b1a3b546a5b1b354e5bd6e53e87ed806315d043
    revision
    audit-r2-6bd3e8beecb0
    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 therapies targeting cognition, motivation and behaviour Two to 50 sessions across trials
comparator
Usual care, no treatment, delayed or minimal interventions
sample
33 trials; 5517 women
measurement
Depression; PTSD; Repeat IPV
timing
Six to under12 months
trial Id
relationship Note
Direct evidence concerning therapeutic or psychosocial responses to IPV, with survivor and perpetrator findings kept distinct. Allocation concealment was adequately described in only 12 trials. Harms were poorly measured; dropout similarity is not proof of no harm.
measured Genes
None recorded
pathways
None recorded
source Access
level
abstract
source URLs

https://europepmc.org/article/MED/32608505 · https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32608505/

retrieved At
2026-10-30T07:25:20.171273+00:00
outcomes
  1. name
    Depression
    follow Up
    Six to under12 months
    result
    Probable modest benefit
    effect Estimate
    SMD -0.24
    uncertainty
    95% CI -0.47 to -0.01; four trials,600 women; moderate certainty
    primary Status
    Primary review outcome
  2. name
    PTSD
    follow Up
    Six to under12 months
    result
    No clear effect
    effect Estimate
    SMD -0.24
    uncertainty
    95% CI -0.54 to 0.06; low certainty
    primary Status
    Secondary review outcome
  3. name
    Repeat IPV
    follow Up
    Six to under12 months
    result
    No clear effect
    effect Estimate
    SMD 0.03
    uncertainty
    95% CI -0.14 to 0.20; low certainty
    primary Status
    Secondary review outcome
quality
risk Of Bias
Allocation concealment was adequately described in only 12 trials. Harms were poorly measured; dropout similarity is not proof of no harm.
attrition
Not established from accessed abstract.
confounding
Study-design heterogeneity, overlapping trials and review-specific eligibility limit pooling across reviews.
adverse Findings
Only one trial measured harm with a validated scale; no reported adverse events does not establish absence of harm.
transfer Limits
Allocation concealment was adequately described in only 12 trials. Harms were poorly measured; dropout similarity is not proof of no harm.
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 aged 16 or older reporting recent or lifetime IPV
exposure Evidence
The accessed publication explicitly identifies women aged 16 or older reporting recent or lifetime ipv.
rationale
Direct evidence concerning therapeutic or psychosocial responses to IPV, with survivor and perpetrator findings kept distinct.
transfer Limit
Allocation concealment was adequately described in only 12 trials. Harms were poorly measured; dropout similarity is not proof of no harm.
jadad
status
not-applicable
score
Not recorded
condition Evidence
  1. id
    ptsd
    evidence
    1. field
      outcomes
      text
      Depression | PTSD | Repeat IPV
      matched Text
      PTSD
    scope
    Study population or investigated outcome; not a diagnosis or efficacy claim.
  2. id
    depression
    evidence
    1. field
      outcomes
      text
      Depression | PTSD | Repeat IPV
      matched Text
      Depression
    scope
    Study population or investigated outcome; not a diagnosis or efficacy claim.
conditions

ptsd · depression

topic Trust Scores

2

full Text
status
not-indexed
retrieval Available
false

Open this publication in the interactive library