Universal Informatics · Research reading room

Examining strength at home couples to prevent intimate partner violence on a military installation: A randomized controlled trial.

Taft CT; Rothman EF; Gallagher MW; Hamilton EG; Garza A; Creech SK · Journal of consulting and clinical psychology · 2024 · Randomized controlled trial

Original publication · Original publication · Original publication · Original publication · Original publication · Original publication

Recorded summary

Effect-size patterns favored Strength at Home Couples for several IPV outcomes and suicidality; partner findings were less robust.

Recorded limitations

The abstract reports patterns without numerical estimates or intervals. Do not infer statistical significance for every outcome; selected military couples may differ from high-danger survivor settings.

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
Randomized controlled trial
assessment
category
rct
is Randomized Controlled Trial
true
basis
Methods explicitly describe138 couples randomized to SAH-C or Supportive Prevention.
sources

https://europepmc.org/article/MED/38206858 · https://api.crossref.org/works/10.1037%2Fccp0000863 · https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT04517994 · https://cdn.clinicaltrials.gov/large-docs/94/NCT04517994/Prot_SAP_000.pdf

review Scope
abstract
trust Factor
scope
Paper
status
assessed
score
2
randomized Controlled Trial
true
peer Reviewed
true
blinding
not-confirmed
basis
Methods explicitly describe138 couples randomized to SAH-C or Supportive Prevention.
sources

https://europepmc.org/article/MED/38206858 · https://api.crossref.org/works/10.1037%2Fccp0000863 · https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT04517994 · https://cdn.clinicaltrials.gov/large-docs/94/NCT04517994/Prot_SAP_000.pdf

review Scope
abstract
human Approval
false
display Crosses
2
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
unassessed
score
Not recorded
evidence
evidence Type
Randomized controlled trial
intervention
Strength at Home Couples Not established from accessed abstract.
comparator
Supportive Prevention couples programme
sample
138 couples randomized
measurement
Physical, psychological, sexual and coercive-control IPV; Suicidality
timing
Across assessments
trial Id
relationship Note
Direct evidence concerning therapeutic or psychosocial responses to IPV, with survivor and perpetrator findings kept distinct. The abstract reports patterns without numerical estimates or intervals. Do not infer statistical significance for every outcome; selected military couples may differ from high-danger survivor settings.
measured Genes
None recorded
pathways
None recorded
source Access
level
abstract
source URLs

https://europepmc.org/article/MED/38206858 · https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38206858/

retrieved At
2026-10-30T07:25:20.171273+00:00
outcomes
  1. name
    Physical, psychological, sexual and coercive-control IPV
    follow Up
    Across assessments
    result
    Effect-size patterns favored intervention
    effect Estimate
    Not supplied in abstract
    uncertainty
    Partner findings less robust
    primary Status
    Not established from accessed abstract.
  2. name
    Suicidality
    follow Up
    Across assessments
    result
    Effect-size patterns favored intervention
    effect Estimate
    Not supplied in abstract
    uncertainty
    Exact estimates/uncertainty not established
    primary Status
    Not established from accessed abstract.
quality
risk Of Bias
The abstract reports patterns without numerical estimates or intervals. Do not infer statistical significance for every outcome; selected military couples may differ from high-danger survivor settings.
attrition
Not established from accessed abstract.
confounding
Trial comparability and remaining biases need full methods appraisal.
adverse Findings
Not established from accessed abstract.
transfer Limits
The abstract reports patterns without numerical estimates or intervals. Do not infer statistical significance for every outcome; selected military couples may differ from high-danger survivor settings.
jadad
not established
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
Military service members and their partners
exposure Evidence
The accessed publication explicitly identifies military service members and their partners.
rationale
Direct evidence concerning therapeutic or psychosocial responses to IPV, with survivor and perpetrator findings kept distinct.
transfer Limit
The abstract reports patterns without numerical estimates or intervals. Do not infer statistical significance for every outcome; selected military couples may differ from high-danger survivor settings.
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-38206858
doi
10.1037/ccp0000863
pmid
38206858
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-r2-463894f3c525
source Content Hash
463894f3c525a8006c406dc87bcb606e40d221821a55944da4b142a93840a588
source Access
level
abstract
source URLs

https://europepmc.org/article/MED/38206858 · https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38206858/

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
19b0dc99ef364464759fe69518ea97a47c8fb18a076d50971191438fff082ed9
prior Revision
r1-19b0dc99ef36
prior Source
frozen-120
source Verification
id
dv-reviews-38206858
doi
10.1037/ccp0000863
pmid
38206858
fresh Metadata
Europe PMC core
metadata Retrieved
true
metadata SHA256
271e92f3b4b66dbca1b95920b1187fe502acc4a0f0a5aab54be0531bcd956d65
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/38206858 · https://api.crossref.org/works/10.1037%2Fccp0000863

applied Proposals

methods-prevention/proposed-revisions.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 Family Id
trial-paper:38206858
family Linkage Uncertain
true
approaches
None recorded
id
dv-reviews-38206858
aliases
None recorded
title
Examining strength at home couples to prevent intimate partner violence on a military installation: A randomized controlled trial.
journal
Journal of consulting and clinical psychology
neurotransmitters
None recorded
year
2024
authors
Taft CT; Rothman EF; Gallagher MW; Hamilton EG; Garza A; Creech SK
design
Randomized controlled trial
kind
Journal article
identity Conflict
Not recorded
doi
10.1037/ccp0000863
pmid
38206858
urls

https://doi.org/10.1037/ccp0000863 · https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38206858/ · https://europepmc.org/article/MED/38206858 · https://api.crossref.org/works/10.1037%2Fccp0000863 · https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT04517994 · https://cdn.clinicaltrials.gov/large-docs/94/NCT04517994/Prot_SAP_000.pdf

collections

language

categories

Clinical & self-report

targets
None recorded
priority
1
quotes
None recorded
summary
Effect-size patterns favored Strength at Home Couples for several IPV outcomes and suicidality; partner findings were less robust.
limitation
The abstract reports patterns without numerical estimates or intervals. Do not infer statistical significance for every outcome; selected military couples may differ from high-danger survivor settings.
citation Count
Not recorded
citation Snapshot
count
Not recorded
source
Not recorded
retrieved At
Not recorded
status
not-assessed
study Design Assessment
category
rct
is Randomized Controlled Trial
true
basis
Methods explicitly describe138 couples randomized to SAH-C or Supportive Prevention.
sources

https://europepmc.org/article/MED/38206858 · https://api.crossref.org/works/10.1037%2Fccp0000863 · https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT04517994 · https://cdn.clinicaltrials.gov/large-docs/94/NCT04517994/Prot_SAP_000.pdf

review Scope
abstract
paper Trust Assessment
scope
Paper
status
assessed
score
2
randomized Controlled Trial
true
peer Reviewed
true
blinding
not-confirmed
basis
Methods explicitly describe138 couples randomized to SAH-C or Supportive Prevention.
sources

https://europepmc.org/article/MED/38206858 · https://api.crossref.org/works/10.1037%2Fccp0000863 · https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT04517994 · https://cdn.clinicaltrials.gov/large-docs/94/NCT04517994/Prot_SAP_000.pdf

review Scope
abstract
human Approval
false
display Crosses
2
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
journalofconsultingandclinicalpsychology
journal Label
Journal of consulting and clinical psychology
chapter Entries
  1. id
    language-dv-dv-reviews-38206858
    aliases
    None recorded
    title
    Examining strength at home couples to prevent intimate partner violence on a military installation: A randomized controlled trial.
    authors
    Taft CT; Rothman EF; Gallagher MW; Hamilton EG; Garza A; Creech SK
    year
    2024
    journal
    Journal of consulting and clinical psychology
    doi
    10.1037/ccp0000863
    pmid
    38206858
    urls

    https://doi.org/10.1037/ccp0000863 · https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38206858/ · https://europepmc.org/article/MED/38206858 · https://api.crossref.org/works/10.1037%2Fccp0000863 · https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT04517994 · https://cdn.clinicaltrials.gov/large-docs/94/NCT04517994/Prot_SAP_000.pdf

    collections

    language

    categories

    Clinical & self-report

    targets
    None recorded
    neurotransmitters
    None recorded
    conditions
    None recorded
    condition Evidence
    None recorded
    age Groups

    adults

    age Population
    record Id
    dv-reviews-38206858
    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/38206858
    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
    2. category Id
      defence
      relation
      direct
    kind
    Journal article
    design
    Randomized controlled trial
    origin
    approved-dv-20261101
    priority
    1
    quotes
    None recorded
    finding
    Effect-size patterns favored Strength at Home Couples for several IPV outcomes and suicidality; partner findings were less robust.
    summary
    Effect-size patterns favored Strength at Home Couples for several IPV outcomes and suicidality; partner findings were less robust.
    limitation
    The abstract reports patterns without numerical estimates or intervals. Do not infer statistical significance for every outcome; selected military couples may differ from high-danger survivor settings.
    evidence
    evidence Type
    Randomized controlled trial
    intervention
    Strength at Home Couples Not established from accessed abstract.
    comparator
    Supportive Prevention couples programme
    sample
    138 couples randomized
    measurement
    Physical, psychological, sexual and coercive-control IPV; Suicidality
    timing
    Across assessments
    trial Id
    relationship Note
    Direct evidence concerning therapeutic or psychosocial responses to IPV, with survivor and perpetrator findings kept distinct. The abstract reports patterns without numerical estimates or intervals. Do not infer statistical significance for every outcome; selected military couples may differ from high-danger survivor settings.
    measured Genes
    None recorded
    pathways
    None recorded
    source Access
    level
    abstract
    source URLs

    https://europepmc.org/article/MED/38206858 · https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38206858/

    retrieved At
    2026-10-30T07:25:20.171273+00:00
    outcomes
    1. name
      Physical, psychological, sexual and coercive-control IPV
      follow Up
      Across assessments
      result
      Effect-size patterns favored intervention
      effect Estimate
      Not supplied in abstract
      uncertainty
      Partner findings less robust
      primary Status
      Not established from accessed abstract.
    2. name
      Suicidality
      follow Up
      Across assessments
      result
      Effect-size patterns favored intervention
      effect Estimate
      Not supplied in abstract
      uncertainty
      Exact estimates/uncertainty not established
      primary Status
      Not established from accessed abstract.
    quality
    risk Of Bias
    The abstract reports patterns without numerical estimates or intervals. Do not infer statistical significance for every outcome; selected military couples may differ from high-danger survivor settings.
    attrition
    Not established from accessed abstract.
    confounding
    Trial comparability and remaining biases need full methods appraisal.
    adverse Findings
    Not established from accessed abstract.
    transfer Limits
    The abstract reports patterns without numerical estimates or intervals. Do not infer statistical significance for every outcome; selected military couples may differ from high-danger survivor settings.
    jadad
    not established
    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
    Military service members and their partners
    exposure Evidence
    The accessed publication explicitly identifies military service members and their partners.
    rationale
    Direct evidence concerning therapeutic or psychosocial responses to IPV, with survivor and perpetrator findings kept distinct.
    transfer Limit
    The abstract reports patterns without numerical estimates or intervals. Do not infer statistical significance for every outcome; selected military couples may differ from high-danger survivor settings.
    study Design Assessment
    category
    rct
    is Randomized Controlled Trial
    true
    basis
    Methods explicitly describe138 couples randomized to SAH-C or Supportive Prevention.
    sources

    https://europepmc.org/article/MED/38206858 · https://api.crossref.org/works/10.1037%2Fccp0000863 · https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT04517994 · https://cdn.clinicaltrials.gov/large-docs/94/NCT04517994/Prot_SAP_000.pdf

    review Scope
    abstract
    paper Trust Assessment
    scope
    Paper
    status
    assessed
    score
    2
    randomized Controlled Trial
    true
    peer Reviewed
    true
    blinding
    not-confirmed
    basis
    Methods explicitly describe138 couples randomized to SAH-C or Supportive Prevention.
    sources

    https://europepmc.org/article/MED/38206858 · https://api.crossref.org/works/10.1037%2Fccp0000863 · https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT04517994 · https://cdn.clinicaltrials.gov/large-docs/94/NCT04517994/Prot_SAP_000.pdf

    review Scope
    abstract
    human Approval
    false
    display Crosses
    2
    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
    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-r2-463894f3c525
    source Content Hash
    463894f3c525a8006c406dc87bcb606e40d221821a55944da4b142a93840a588
    source Access
    level
    abstract
    source URLs

    https://europepmc.org/article/MED/38206858 · https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38206858/

    retrieved At
    2026-10-30T07:25:20.171273+00:00
    study Family Id
    trial-paper:38206858
    family Linkage Uncertain
    true
    approaches
    None recorded
    record Id
    dv-reviews-38206858
    source Pages
    None recorded
    editorial Audit
    auditor
    Codex (AI)
    completed At
    2026-10-31T05:11:05.655793+00:00
    prior Content Hash
    19b0dc99ef364464759fe69518ea97a47c8fb18a076d50971191438fff082ed9
    prior Revision
    r1-19b0dc99ef36
    prior Source
    frozen-120
    source Verification
    id
    dv-reviews-38206858
    doi
    10.1037/ccp0000863
    pmid
    38206858
    fresh Metadata
    Europe PMC core
    metadata Retrieved
    true
    metadata SHA256
    271e92f3b4b66dbca1b95920b1187fe502acc4a0f0a5aab54be0531bcd956d65
    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/38206858 · https://api.crossref.org/works/10.1037%2Fccp0000863

    applied Proposals

    methods-prevention/proposed-revisions.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-reviews-38206858
    title
    Examining strength at home couples to prevent intimate partner violence on a military installation: A randomized controlled trial.
    authors

    Taft CT · Rothman EF · Gallagher MW · Hamilton EG · Garza A · Creech SK

    year
    2024
    journal
    Journal of consulting and clinical psychology
    doi
    10.1037/ccp0000863
    pmid
    38206858
    trial Registration
    None recorded
    collection
    language
    intervention Family
    Strength at Home Couples
    publication Type
    Randomized controlled trial
    study Family Id
    trial-paper:38206858
    family Linkage Uncertain
    true
    independent Primary Study
    true
    existing Repository Matches
    None recorded
    relevance
    relation
    direct
    population
    Military service members and their partners
    exposure Evidence
    The accessed publication explicitly identifies military service members and their partners.
    rationale
    Direct evidence concerning therapeutic or psychosocial responses to IPV, with survivor and perpetrator findings kept distinct.
    transfer Limit
    The abstract reports patterns without numerical estimates or intervals. Do not infer statistical significance for every outcome; selected military couples may differ from high-danger survivor settings.
    age
    groups

    adults

    reported Range
    Not established from accessed abstract.
    youth Scope
    Not recorded
    country
    Not established from accessed abstract.
    setting
    Military installation; hybrid effectiveness-implementation trial
    sample Size
    randomized
    138
    analyzed
    Not recorded
    description
    138 couples randomized
    intervention
    description
    Strength at Home Couples
    dose
    Not established from accessed abstract.
    provider
    Not established from accessed abstract.
    comparator
    Supportive Prevention couples programme
    outcomes
    1. name
      Physical, psychological, sexual and coercive-control IPV
      follow Up
      Across assessments
      result
      Effect-size patterns favored intervention
      effect Estimate
      Not supplied in abstract
      uncertainty
      Partner findings less robust
      primary Status
      Not established from accessed abstract.
    2. name
      Suicidality
      follow Up
      Across assessments
      result
      Effect-size patterns favored intervention
      effect Estimate
      Not supplied in abstract
      uncertainty
      Exact estimates/uncertainty not established
      primary Status
      Not established from accessed abstract.
    finding
    Effect-size patterns favored Strength at Home Couples for several IPV outcomes and suicidality; partner findings were less robust.
    limitation
    The abstract reports patterns without numerical estimates or intervals. Do not infer statistical significance for every outcome; selected military couples may differ from high-danger survivor settings.
    design
    type
    Randomized controlled trial
    randomization Evidence
    Methods explicitly describe138 couples randomized to SAH-C or Supportive Prevention.
    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
    1
    cross Rationale
    Random allocation is explicitly described; double blinding not established.
    quality
    risk Of Bias
    The abstract reports patterns without numerical estimates or intervals. Do not infer statistical significance for every outcome; selected military couples may differ from high-danger survivor settings.
    attrition
    Not established from accessed abstract.
    confounding
    Trial comparability and remaining biases need full methods appraisal.
    adverse Findings
    Not established from accessed abstract.
    transfer Limits
    The abstract reports patterns without numerical estimates or intervals. Do not infer statistical significance for every outcome; selected military couples may differ from high-danger survivor settings.
    jadad
    not established
    access
    level
    abstract
    source URLs

    https://europepmc.org/article/MED/38206858 · https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38206858/

    retrieved At
    2026-10-30T07:25:20.171273+00:00
    sources
    1. url
      https://europepmc.org/article/MED/38206858
      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/10.1037%2Fccp0000863
      type
      Crossref publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata
      retrieved At
      2026-10-30T07:26:19.828677+00:00
      identity Verified
      true
      notes
      DOI and normalized title match the Europe PMC record. Bibliographic verification only; not a full-text review.
    3. url
      https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT04517994
      type
      Provisional related ClinicalTrials.gov record
      retrieved At
      2026-10-30T08:36:53.499059+00:00
      identity Verified
      false
      notes
      Not verified as exact publication registration; no linked PMID or results.
    4. url
      https://cdn.clinicaltrials.gov/large-docs/94/NCT04517994/Prot_SAP_000.pdf
      type
      Protocol attached to provisional registry
      retrieved At
      2026-10-30T08:36:53.499059+00:00
      identity Verified
      false
      notes
      Selected design, sample, eligibility and safety sections inspected. Planned procedures are not observed publication methods.
    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
    Contributes randomized prevention evidence for military couples while avoiding significance claims unsupported by the accessed abstract.
    review
    status
    pending
    reviewer
    Not recorded
    assessment Status
    assessed
    assessment Notes
    Candidate NCT04517994 matches programme, investigators, military-installation setting and hybrid design. Its protocol plans10 pilot plus140 trial couples, whereas registry enrollment is150 and publication randomized138 couples. This offers a possible accounting explanation, not verified achieved flow. Exact paper linkage and delivered procedures remain unconfirmed; retain paper-specific family ID and one cross.
    identity Verification
    status
    cross-source-verified
    fields

    DOI · title

    limitation
    Not recorded
    source Evidence Hashes
    crossref SHA256
    7cde88a4f12bb1bd089a68dde948275dde05dcef28e4eb7f5f0cb7feabec65e4
    review Readiness
    ai-editorial-audit-complete-release-pending
    review Ready
    true
    research Lane
    reviews-prevention
    later Review Evidence
    id
    dv-reviews-38206858
    title
    Examining strength at home couples to prevent intimate partner violence on a military installation: A randomized controlled trial.
    prior Revision
    r1-19b0dc99ef36
    prior Content Hash
    19b0dc99ef364464759fe69518ea97a47c8fb18a076d50971191438fff082ed9
    original
    review Ready
    true
    review Readiness
    ready-with-explicit-access-limits
    finding
    Effect-size patterns favored Strength at Home Couples for several IPV outcomes and suicidality; partner findings were less robust.
    limitation
    The abstract reports patterns without numerical estimates or intervals. Do not infer statistical significance for every outcome; selected military couples may differ from high-danger survivor settings.
    adverse Findings
    Not established from accessed abstract.
    crosses
    1
    access
    abstract
    action
    supplement
    hold Current Revision
    false
    cross Verification On Hold
    false
    new Evidence
    A plausibly related protocol plans ten pilot plus 140 trial couples. Registry enrolment is 150, while the publication reports 138 randomized couples. Achieved flow and exact paper linkage remain unverified.
    revised Interpretation
    Retain the qualified abstract interpretation. The planned pilot is only a possible reconciliation; do not transfer planned masking, safety procedures or enrolment to the publication as observed facts.
    required Before Approval
    No new hold on the existing limited abstract finding. Full publication/registration linkage and achieved flow are required for added methods claims.
    source URLs

    https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT04517994 · https://cdn.clinicaltrials.gov/large-docs/94/NCT04517994/Prot_SAP_000.pdf

    source Location
    Protocol pp. 1, 19–21; registry; publication abstract
    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
    19b0dc99ef364464759fe69518ea97a47c8fb18a076d50971191438fff082ed9
    prior Revision
    r1-19b0dc99ef36
    prior Source
    frozen-120
    source Verification
    id
    dv-reviews-38206858
    doi
    10.1037/ccp0000863
    pmid
    38206858
    fresh Metadata
    Europe PMC core
    metadata Retrieved
    true
    metadata SHA256
    271e92f3b4b66dbca1b95920b1187fe502acc4a0f0a5aab54be0531bcd956d65
    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/38206858 · https://api.crossref.org/works/10.1037%2Fccp0000863

    applied Proposals

    methods-prevention/proposed-revisions.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
    Methods explicitly describe138 couples randomized to SAH-C or Supportive Prevention.
    sources

    https://europepmc.org/article/MED/38206858 · https://api.crossref.org/works/10.1037%2Fccp0000863 · https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT04517994 · https://cdn.clinicaltrials.gov/large-docs/94/NCT04517994/Prot_SAP_000.pdf

    review Scope
    abstract
    paper Trust Assessment
    scope
    Paper
    status
    assessed
    score
    2
    randomized Controlled Trial
    true
    peer Reviewed
    true
    blinding
    not-confirmed
    basis
    Random allocation is explicitly described; double blinding not established.
    sources

    https://europepmc.org/article/MED/38206858 · https://api.crossref.org/works/10.1037%2Fccp0000863 · https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT04517994 · https://cdn.clinicaltrials.gov/large-docs/94/NCT04517994/Prot_SAP_000.pdf

    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.
    jadad
    status
    unassessed
    score
    Not recorded
    evidence
    population
    relation
    direct
    population
    Military service members and their partners
    exposure Evidence
    The accessed publication explicitly identifies military service members and their partners.
    rationale
    Direct evidence concerning therapeutic or psychosocial responses to IPV, with survivor and perpetrator findings kept distinct.
    transfer Limit
    The abstract reports patterns without numerical estimates or intervals. Do not infer statistical significance for every outcome; selected military couples may differ from high-danger survivor settings.
    intervention
    description
    Strength at Home Couples
    dose
    Not established from accessed abstract.
    provider
    Not established from accessed abstract.
    comparator
    Supportive Prevention couples programme
    outcomes
    1. name
      Physical, psychological, sexual and coercive-control IPV
      follow Up
      Across assessments
      result
      Effect-size patterns favored intervention
      effect Estimate
      Not supplied in abstract
      uncertainty
      Partner findings less robust
      primary Status
      Not established from accessed abstract.
    2. name
      Suicidality
      follow Up
      Across assessments
      result
      Effect-size patterns favored intervention
      effect Estimate
      Not supplied in abstract
      uncertainty
      Exact estimates/uncertainty not established
      primary Status
      Not established from accessed abstract.
    access
    level
    abstract
    source URLs

    https://europepmc.org/article/MED/38206858 · https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38206858/

    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
    463894f3c525a8006c406dc87bcb606e40d221821a55944da4b142a93840a588
    revision
    audit-r2-463894f3c525
    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
Randomized controlled trial
intervention
Strength at Home Couples Not established from accessed abstract.
comparator
Supportive Prevention couples programme
sample
138 couples randomized
measurement
Physical, psychological, sexual and coercive-control IPV; Suicidality
timing
Across assessments
trial Id
relationship Note
Direct evidence concerning therapeutic or psychosocial responses to IPV, with survivor and perpetrator findings kept distinct. The abstract reports patterns without numerical estimates or intervals. Do not infer statistical significance for every outcome; selected military couples may differ from high-danger survivor settings.
measured Genes
None recorded
pathways
None recorded
source Access
level
abstract
source URLs

https://europepmc.org/article/MED/38206858 · https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38206858/

retrieved At
2026-10-30T07:25:20.171273+00:00
outcomes
  1. name
    Physical, psychological, sexual and coercive-control IPV
    follow Up
    Across assessments
    result
    Effect-size patterns favored intervention
    effect Estimate
    Not supplied in abstract
    uncertainty
    Partner findings less robust
    primary Status
    Not established from accessed abstract.
  2. name
    Suicidality
    follow Up
    Across assessments
    result
    Effect-size patterns favored intervention
    effect Estimate
    Not supplied in abstract
    uncertainty
    Exact estimates/uncertainty not established
    primary Status
    Not established from accessed abstract.
quality
risk Of Bias
The abstract reports patterns without numerical estimates or intervals. Do not infer statistical significance for every outcome; selected military couples may differ from high-danger survivor settings.
attrition
Not established from accessed abstract.
confounding
Trial comparability and remaining biases need full methods appraisal.
adverse Findings
Not established from accessed abstract.
transfer Limits
The abstract reports patterns without numerical estimates or intervals. Do not infer statistical significance for every outcome; selected military couples may differ from high-danger survivor settings.
jadad
not established
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
Military service members and their partners
exposure Evidence
The accessed publication explicitly identifies military service members and their partners.
rationale
Direct evidence concerning therapeutic or psychosocial responses to IPV, with survivor and perpetrator findings kept distinct.
transfer Limit
The abstract reports patterns without numerical estimates or intervals. Do not infer statistical significance for every outcome; selected military couples may differ from high-danger survivor settings.
jadad
status
unassessed
score
Not recorded
condition Evidence
None recorded
conditions
None recorded
topic Trust Scores

2

full Text
status
not-indexed
retrieval Available
false

Open this publication in the interactive library