Systematic Investigation of Meta-Analysis Data on Treatment Effectiveness for Physical, Psychological, and Sexual Intimate Partner Violence Perpetration.
Oğuztüzün Ç; Koyutürk M; Karakurt G · Psychosocial intervention · 2023 · Secondary meta-regression of previously reviewed intervention studies
Original publication · Original publication · Original publication · Original publication
Recorded summary
The analysis relates study-average baseline violence patterns and treatment components to pre/post changes. It cannot establish which component works for an individual or prove superiority between treatments.
Recorded limitations
Ecological associations, uncontrolled change scores, heterogeneous programmes and imputation limit inference. Missing predictors were imputed with k-nearest neighbors (k=5); narrative study-flow arithmetic and sexual-violence study totals are inconsistent, so exact subsidiary counts and treatment rankings are not adopted.
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
- Secondary meta-regression of previously reviewed intervention studies
- assessment
- category
- review
- is Randomized Controlled Trial
- false
- basis
- Evidence synthesis or secondary meta-regression; this publication does not randomize participants. Included-study design labels do not confer trial crosses.
- sources
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10294456/ · https://api.crossref.org/works/10.5093%2Fpi2023a6
- review Scope
- selected-methods
- trust Factor
- scope
- Paper
- status
- assessed
- score
- 1
- randomized Controlled Trial
- false
- peer Reviewed
- true
- blinding
- not-applicable
- basis
- Evidence synthesis or secondary meta-regression; this publication does not randomize participants. Included-study design labels do not confer trial crosses.
- sources
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10294456/ · https://api.crossref.org/works/10.5093%2Fpi2023a6
- review Scope
- selected-methods
- human Approval
- false
- display Crosses
- 1
- masking Roles
- participants
- Not applicable to this evidence-synthesis publication; primary-trial masking was not newly verified.
- providers
- Not applicable to this evidence-synthesis publication; primary-trial masking was not newly verified.
- assessors
- Not applicable to this evidence-synthesis publication; primary-trial masking was not newly verified.
- analysts
- Not applicable to this evidence-synthesis publication; primary-trial masking was not newly verified.
- rating Scale
- library-trust-factor/1-3
- jadad
- status
- not-applicable
- score
- Not recorded
- evidence
- evidence Type
- Secondary meta-regression of previously reviewed intervention studies
- intervention
- Study-level combinations of CBT, substance-use treatment, motivational work and other perpetrator programme components. Varied by source study; no shared regimen.
- comparator
- Within-study pre/post mean changes and variance changes, related to study-level treatment indicators; not a randomized comparison of treatment components.
- sample
- 16 studies reused from Karakurt et al. 2019; no new eligible studies added by the update search. Participant total not established in this assessment.
- measurement
- Physical, psychological and sexual IPV change; Variance change
- timing
- Source study pre/post periods
- trial Id
- relationship Note
- Adds a methodological audit of a previously included evidence base; it is not new independent trial evidence or a basis for individualized treatment ranking. Ecological associations, uncontrolled change scores, heterogeneous programmes and imputation limit inference. Missing predictors were imputed with k-nearest neighbors (k=5); narrative study-flow arithmetic and sexual-violence study totals are inconsistent, so exact subsidiary counts and treatment rankings are not adopted.
- measured Genes
- None recorded
- pathways
- None recorded
- source Access
- level
- selected-methods
- source URLs
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10294456/ · https://www.ebi.ac.uk/europepmc/webservices/rest/PMC10294456/fullTextXML · https://api.crossref.org/works/10.5093%2Fpi2023a6
- retrieved At
- 2026-10-30T08:08:17.168330+00:00
- sections Inspected
Methods: prior data, missing-data handling, normalization and meta-regression models · Results: outcome, treatment and violence-variable analyses · Discussion and ecological-inference limitations
- outcomes
- name
- Physical, psychological and sexual IPV change
- follow Up
- Source study pre/post periods
- result
- Study-level associations vary by baseline pattern and treatment coding
- effect Estimate
- Not recorded
- uncertainty
- No patient-level or randomized comparative efficacy estimate is inferred.
- primary Status
- Review outcome; no participant-randomized trial conducted by this publication.
- name
- Variance change
- follow Up
- Source study pre/post periods
- result
- Reported associations in within-study outcome variability
- effect Estimate
- Not recorded
- uncertainty
- Not an outcome demonstrating reduced partner harm.
- primary Status
- Review outcome; no participant-randomized trial conducted by this publication.
- quality
- risk Of Bias
- No new independent trial risk-of-bias assessment was identified in inspected methods. Reuses the prior meta-analysis dataset; qualitative causal claims exceed what these study-level associations establish.
- attrition
- Underlying study attrition remains part of the source dataset; not newly reconciled.
- confounding
- Ecological associations, uncontrolled change scores, heterogeneous programmes and imputation limit inference. Missing predictors were imputed with k-nearest neighbors (k=5); narrative study-flow arithmetic and sexual-violence study totals are inconsistent, so exact subsidiary counts and treatment rankings are not adopted.
- adverse Findings
- No reliable pooled adverse-event estimate; positive pre/post regression coefficients are not causal estimates of treatment-induced harm.
- transfer Limits
- Ecological associations, uncontrolled change scores, heterogeneous programmes and imputation limit inference. Missing predictors were imputed with k-nearest neighbors (k=5); narrative study-flow arithmetic and sexual-violence study totals are inconsistent, so exact subsidiary counts and treatment rankings are not adopted.
- jadad
- not applicable
- masking Roles
- participants
- Not applicable to this evidence-synthesis publication; primary-trial masking was not newly verified.
- providers
- Not applicable to this evidence-synthesis publication; primary-trial masking was not newly verified.
- assessors
- Not applicable to this evidence-synthesis publication; primary-trial masking was not newly verified.
- analysts
- Not applicable to this evidence-synthesis publication; primary-trial masking was not newly verified.
- population
- relation
- direct
- population
- Male IPV perpetrators represented in a prior intervention-study dataset
- exposure Evidence
- Eligibility and study population descriptions explicitly concern IPV perpetrators, IPV-exposed survivors/children, or IPV prevention.
- rationale
- Adds a methodological audit of a previously included evidence base; it is not new independent trial evidence or a basis for individualized treatment ranking.
- transfer Limit
- Ecological associations, uncontrolled change scores, heterogeneous programmes and imputation limit inference. Missing predictors were imputed with k-nearest neighbors (k=5); narrative study-flow arithmetic and sexual-violence study totals are inconsistent, so exact subsidiary counts and treatment rankings are not adopted.
Topics and recorded topic scores
- key
- language:domestic-family-violence
- title
- Domestic & Family Violence
- collection
- language
- trust Score
- 2
Citation snapshot and identifiers
- id
- dv-reviews-cont-37383644
- doi
- 10.5093/pi2023a6
- pmid
- 37383644
- 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-d7d8106bcd70
- source Content Hash
- d7d8106bcd70b14c16d5c56227712fbc51d8b10d0f7d8ef60d97f159f8d74db0
- source Access
- level
- selected-methods
- source URLs
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10294456/ · https://www.ebi.ac.uk/europepmc/webservices/rest/PMC10294456/fullTextXML · https://api.crossref.org/works/10.5093%2Fpi2023a6
- retrieved At
- 2026-10-30T08:08:17.168330+00:00
- sections Inspected
Methods: prior data, missing-data handling, normalization and meta-regression models · Results: outcome, treatment and violence-variable analyses · Discussion and ecological-inference limitations
- editorial Audit
- auditor
- Codex (AI)
- completed At
- 2026-10-31T05:11:05.655793+00:00
- prior Content Hash
- Not recorded
- prior Revision
- Not recorded
- prior Source
- continuation-10
- source Verification
- id
- dv-reviews-cont-37383644
- doi
- 10.5093/pi2023a6
- pmid
- 37383644
- fresh Metadata
- Europe PMC core
- metadata Retrieved
- true
- metadata SHA256
- beb628f74c56094aa06f93c19aec0c0b36b8b624d735b34b12c7ed40efe23793
- claim Check
- Headline finding/design/limitations compared with indexed abstract or accessible primary evidence; retained methods amendments separately adjudicated.
- sources
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10294456/ · https://api.crossref.org/works/10.5093%2Fpi2023a6
- 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:31415863
- family Linkage Uncertain
- false
- approaches
- None recorded
- id
- dv-reviews-cont-37383644
- aliases
- None recorded
- title
- Systematic Investigation of Meta-Analysis Data on Treatment Effectiveness for Physical, Psychological, and Sexual Intimate Partner Violence Perpetration.
- journal
- Psychosocial intervention
- neurotransmitters
- None recorded
- year
- 2023
- authors
- Oğuztüzün Ç; Koyutürk M; Karakurt G
- design
- Secondary meta-regression of previously reviewed intervention studies
- kind
- Review
- identity Conflict
- Not recorded
- doi
- 10.5093/pi2023a6
- pmid
- 37383644
- urls
https://doi.org/10.5093/pi2023a6 · https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37383644/ · https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10294456/ · https://api.crossref.org/works/10.5093%2Fpi2023a6
- collections
language
- categories
Clinical & self-report · Methods & context
- targets
- None recorded
- priority
- 1
- quotes
- None recorded
- summary
- The analysis relates study-average baseline violence patterns and treatment components to pre/post changes. It cannot establish which component works for an individual or prove superiority between treatments.
- limitation
- Ecological associations, uncontrolled change scores, heterogeneous programmes and imputation limit inference. Missing predictors were imputed with k-nearest neighbors (k=5); narrative study-flow arithmetic and sexual-violence study totals are inconsistent, so exact subsidiary counts and treatment rankings are not adopted.
- 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 or secondary meta-regression; this publication does not randomize participants. Included-study design labels do not confer trial crosses.
- sources
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10294456/ · https://api.crossref.org/works/10.5093%2Fpi2023a6
- review Scope
- selected-methods
- paper Trust Assessment
- scope
- Paper
- status
- assessed
- score
- 1
- randomized Controlled Trial
- false
- peer Reviewed
- true
- blinding
- not-applicable
- basis
- Evidence synthesis or secondary meta-regression; this publication does not randomize participants. Included-study design labels do not confer trial crosses.
- sources
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10294456/ · https://api.crossref.org/works/10.5093%2Fpi2023a6
- review Scope
- selected-methods
- human Approval
- false
- display Crosses
- 1
- masking Roles
- participants
- Not applicable to this evidence-synthesis publication; primary-trial masking was not newly verified.
- providers
- Not applicable to this evidence-synthesis publication; primary-trial masking was not newly verified.
- assessors
- Not applicable to this evidence-synthesis publication; primary-trial masking was not newly verified.
- analysts
- Not applicable to this evidence-synthesis publication; primary-trial masking was not newly verified.
- rating Scale
- library-trust-factor/1-3
- citations By Collection
- language
- Not recorded
- topics
- key
- language:domestic-family-violence
- title
- Domestic & Family Violence
- collection
- language
- trust Score
- 2
- journal Key
- psychosocialintervention
- journal Label
- Psychosocial intervention
- chapter Entries
- id
- language-dv-dv-reviews-cont-37383644
- aliases
- None recorded
- title
- Systematic Investigation of Meta-Analysis Data on Treatment Effectiveness for Physical, Psychological, and Sexual Intimate Partner Violence Perpetration.
- authors
- Oğuztüzün Ç; Koyutürk M; Karakurt G
- year
- 2023
- journal
- Psychosocial intervention
- doi
- 10.5093/pi2023a6
- pmid
- 37383644
- urls
https://doi.org/10.5093/pi2023a6 · https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37383644/ · https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10294456/ · https://api.crossref.org/works/10.5093%2Fpi2023a6
- collections
language
- categories
Clinical & self-report · Methods & context
- targets
- None recorded
- neurotransmitters
- None recorded
- conditions
- None recorded
- condition Evidence
- None recorded
- age Groups
adults
- age Population
- record Id
- dv-reviews-cont-37383644
- collections
language
- groups
adults
- reported Ages
- Not established from the inspected source sections.
- youth Scope
- Not recorded
- youth Source Note
- Not recorded
- source URL
- https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10294456/
- 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
- category Id
- domestic-violence
- relation
- direct
- kind
- Review
- design
- Secondary meta-regression of previously reviewed intervention studies
- origin
- approved-dv-20261101
- priority
- 1
- quotes
- None recorded
- finding
- The analysis relates study-average baseline violence patterns and treatment components to pre/post changes. It cannot establish which component works for an individual or prove superiority between treatments.
- summary
- The analysis relates study-average baseline violence patterns and treatment components to pre/post changes. It cannot establish which component works for an individual or prove superiority between treatments.
- limitation
- Ecological associations, uncontrolled change scores, heterogeneous programmes and imputation limit inference. Missing predictors were imputed with k-nearest neighbors (k=5); narrative study-flow arithmetic and sexual-violence study totals are inconsistent, so exact subsidiary counts and treatment rankings are not adopted.
- evidence
- evidence Type
- Secondary meta-regression of previously reviewed intervention studies
- intervention
- Study-level combinations of CBT, substance-use treatment, motivational work and other perpetrator programme components. Varied by source study; no shared regimen.
- comparator
- Within-study pre/post mean changes and variance changes, related to study-level treatment indicators; not a randomized comparison of treatment components.
- sample
- 16 studies reused from Karakurt et al. 2019; no new eligible studies added by the update search. Participant total not established in this assessment.
- measurement
- Physical, psychological and sexual IPV change; Variance change
- timing
- Source study pre/post periods
- trial Id
- relationship Note
- Adds a methodological audit of a previously included evidence base; it is not new independent trial evidence or a basis for individualized treatment ranking. Ecological associations, uncontrolled change scores, heterogeneous programmes and imputation limit inference. Missing predictors were imputed with k-nearest neighbors (k=5); narrative study-flow arithmetic and sexual-violence study totals are inconsistent, so exact subsidiary counts and treatment rankings are not adopted.
- measured Genes
- None recorded
- pathways
- None recorded
- source Access
- level
- selected-methods
- source URLs
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10294456/ · https://www.ebi.ac.uk/europepmc/webservices/rest/PMC10294456/fullTextXML · https://api.crossref.org/works/10.5093%2Fpi2023a6
- retrieved At
- 2026-10-30T08:08:17.168330+00:00
- sections Inspected
Methods: prior data, missing-data handling, normalization and meta-regression models · Results: outcome, treatment and violence-variable analyses · Discussion and ecological-inference limitations
- outcomes
- name
- Physical, psychological and sexual IPV change
- follow Up
- Source study pre/post periods
- result
- Study-level associations vary by baseline pattern and treatment coding
- effect Estimate
- Not recorded
- uncertainty
- No patient-level or randomized comparative efficacy estimate is inferred.
- primary Status
- Review outcome; no participant-randomized trial conducted by this publication.
- name
- Variance change
- follow Up
- Source study pre/post periods
- result
- Reported associations in within-study outcome variability
- effect Estimate
- Not recorded
- uncertainty
- Not an outcome demonstrating reduced partner harm.
- primary Status
- Review outcome; no participant-randomized trial conducted by this publication.
- quality
- risk Of Bias
- No new independent trial risk-of-bias assessment was identified in inspected methods. Reuses the prior meta-analysis dataset; qualitative causal claims exceed what these study-level associations establish.
- attrition
- Underlying study attrition remains part of the source dataset; not newly reconciled.
- confounding
- Ecological associations, uncontrolled change scores, heterogeneous programmes and imputation limit inference. Missing predictors were imputed with k-nearest neighbors (k=5); narrative study-flow arithmetic and sexual-violence study totals are inconsistent, so exact subsidiary counts and treatment rankings are not adopted.
- adverse Findings
- No reliable pooled adverse-event estimate; positive pre/post regression coefficients are not causal estimates of treatment-induced harm.
- transfer Limits
- Ecological associations, uncontrolled change scores, heterogeneous programmes and imputation limit inference. Missing predictors were imputed with k-nearest neighbors (k=5); narrative study-flow arithmetic and sexual-violence study totals are inconsistent, so exact subsidiary counts and treatment rankings are not adopted.
- jadad
- not applicable
- masking Roles
- participants
- Not applicable to this evidence-synthesis publication; primary-trial masking was not newly verified.
- providers
- Not applicable to this evidence-synthesis publication; primary-trial masking was not newly verified.
- assessors
- Not applicable to this evidence-synthesis publication; primary-trial masking was not newly verified.
- analysts
- Not applicable to this evidence-synthesis publication; primary-trial masking was not newly verified.
- population
- relation
- direct
- population
- Male IPV perpetrators represented in a prior intervention-study dataset
- exposure Evidence
- Eligibility and study population descriptions explicitly concern IPV perpetrators, IPV-exposed survivors/children, or IPV prevention.
- rationale
- Adds a methodological audit of a previously included evidence base; it is not new independent trial evidence or a basis for individualized treatment ranking.
- transfer Limit
- Ecological associations, uncontrolled change scores, heterogeneous programmes and imputation limit inference. Missing predictors were imputed with k-nearest neighbors (k=5); narrative study-flow arithmetic and sexual-violence study totals are inconsistent, so exact subsidiary counts and treatment rankings are not adopted.
- study Design Assessment
- category
- review
- is Randomized Controlled Trial
- false
- basis
- Evidence synthesis or secondary meta-regression; this publication does not randomize participants. Included-study design labels do not confer trial crosses.
- sources
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10294456/ · https://api.crossref.org/works/10.5093%2Fpi2023a6
- review Scope
- selected-methods
- paper Trust Assessment
- scope
- Paper
- status
- assessed
- score
- 1
- randomized Controlled Trial
- false
- peer Reviewed
- true
- blinding
- not-applicable
- basis
- Evidence synthesis or secondary meta-regression; this publication does not randomize participants. Included-study design labels do not confer trial crosses.
- sources
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10294456/ · https://api.crossref.org/works/10.5093%2Fpi2023a6
- review Scope
- selected-methods
- human Approval
- false
- display Crosses
- 1
- masking Roles
- participants
- Not applicable to this evidence-synthesis publication; primary-trial masking was not newly verified.
- providers
- Not applicable to this evidence-synthesis publication; primary-trial masking was not newly verified.
- assessors
- Not applicable to this evidence-synthesis publication; primary-trial masking was not newly verified.
- analysts
- Not applicable to this evidence-synthesis publication; primary-trial masking was not newly verified.
- 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-d7d8106bcd70
- source Content Hash
- d7d8106bcd70b14c16d5c56227712fbc51d8b10d0f7d8ef60d97f159f8d74db0
- source Access
- level
- selected-methods
- source URLs
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10294456/ · https://www.ebi.ac.uk/europepmc/webservices/rest/PMC10294456/fullTextXML · https://api.crossref.org/works/10.5093%2Fpi2023a6
- retrieved At
- 2026-10-30T08:08:17.168330+00:00
- sections Inspected
Methods: prior data, missing-data handling, normalization and meta-regression models · Results: outcome, treatment and violence-variable analyses · Discussion and ecological-inference limitations
- study Family Id
- review:31415863
- family Linkage Uncertain
- false
- approaches
- None recorded
- record Id
- dv-reviews-cont-37383644
- source Pages
- None recorded
- editorial Audit
- auditor
- Codex (AI)
- completed At
- 2026-10-31T05:11:05.655793+00:00
- prior Content Hash
- Not recorded
- prior Revision
- Not recorded
- prior Source
- continuation-10
- source Verification
- id
- dv-reviews-cont-37383644
- doi
- 10.5093/pi2023a6
- pmid
- 37383644
- fresh Metadata
- Europe PMC core
- metadata Retrieved
- true
- metadata SHA256
- beb628f74c56094aa06f93c19aec0c0b36b8b624d735b34b12c7ed40efe23793
- claim Check
- Headline finding/design/limitations compared with indexed abstract or accessible primary evidence; retained methods amendments separately adjudicated.
- sources
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10294456/ · https://api.crossref.org/works/10.5093%2Fpi2023a6
- 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-cont-37383644
- title
- Systematic Investigation of Meta-Analysis Data on Treatment Effectiveness for Physical, Psychological, and Sexual Intimate Partner Violence Perpetration.
- authors
Oğuztüzün Ç · Koyutürk M · Karakurt G
- year
- 2023
- journal
- Psychosocial intervention
- doi
- 10.5093/pi2023a6
- pmid
- 37383644
- trial Registration
- None recorded
- collection
- language
- intervention Family
- Study-level combinations of CBT, substance-use treatment, motivational work and other perpetrator programme components.
- publication Type
- Secondary meta-regression of previously reviewed intervention studies
- study Family Id
- review:31415863
- family Linkage Uncertain
- false
- independent Primary Study
- false
- existing Repository Matches
- None recorded
- frozen Batch Publication Matches
- None recorded
- related Evidence Family Records
dv-reviews-31415863
- relevance
- relation
- direct
- population
- Male IPV perpetrators represented in a prior intervention-study dataset
- exposure Evidence
- Eligibility and study population descriptions explicitly concern IPV perpetrators, IPV-exposed survivors/children, or IPV prevention.
- rationale
- Adds a methodological audit of a previously included evidence base; it is not new independent trial evidence or a basis for individualized treatment ranking.
- transfer Limit
- Ecological associations, uncontrolled change scores, heterogeneous programmes and imputation limit inference. Missing predictors were imputed with k-nearest neighbors (k=5); narrative study-flow arithmetic and sexual-violence study totals are inconsistent, so exact subsidiary counts and treatment rankings are not adopted.
- age
- groups
adults
- reported Range
- Not established from the inspected source sections.
- youth Scope
- Not recorded
- country
- Multiple locations; distribution not extracted.
- setting
- Heterogeneous perpetrator treatment contexts.
- sample Size
- randomized
- Not recorded
- analyzed
- Not recorded
- description
- 16 studies reused from Karakurt et al. 2019; no new eligible studies added by the update search. Participant total not established in this assessment.
- intervention
- description
- Study-level combinations of CBT, substance-use treatment, motivational work and other perpetrator programme components.
- dose
- Varied by source study; no shared regimen.
- provider
- Not established from the inspected source sections.
- comparator
- Within-study pre/post mean changes and variance changes, related to study-level treatment indicators; not a randomized comparison of treatment components.
- outcomes
- name
- Physical, psychological and sexual IPV change
- follow Up
- Source study pre/post periods
- result
- Study-level associations vary by baseline pattern and treatment coding
- effect Estimate
- Not recorded
- uncertainty
- No patient-level or randomized comparative efficacy estimate is inferred.
- primary Status
- Review outcome; no participant-randomized trial conducted by this publication.
- name
- Variance change
- follow Up
- Source study pre/post periods
- result
- Reported associations in within-study outcome variability
- effect Estimate
- Not recorded
- uncertainty
- Not an outcome demonstrating reduced partner harm.
- primary Status
- Review outcome; no participant-randomized trial conducted by this publication.
- finding
- The analysis relates study-average baseline violence patterns and treatment components to pre/post changes. It cannot establish which component works for an individual or prove superiority between treatments.
- limitation
- Ecological associations, uncontrolled change scores, heterogeneous programmes and imputation limit inference. Missing predictors were imputed with k-nearest neighbors (k=5); narrative study-flow arithmetic and sexual-violence study totals are inconsistent, so exact subsidiary counts and treatment rankings are not adopted.
- design
- type
- Secondary meta-regression of previously reviewed intervention studies
- randomization Evidence
- Evidence synthesis or secondary meta-regression; this publication does not randomize participants. Included-study design labels do not confer trial crosses.
- masking
- participants
- Not applicable to this evidence-synthesis publication; primary-trial masking was not newly verified.
- providers
- Not applicable to this evidence-synthesis publication; primary-trial masking was not newly verified.
- assessors
- Not applicable to this evidence-synthesis publication; primary-trial masking was not newly verified.
- analysts
- Not applicable to this evidence-synthesis publication; primary-trial masking was not newly verified.
- crosses
- 0
- cross Rationale
- Evidence syntheses receive no trial-design crosses.
- quality
- risk Of Bias
- No new independent trial risk-of-bias assessment was identified in inspected methods. Reuses the prior meta-analysis dataset; qualitative causal claims exceed what these study-level associations establish.
- attrition
- Underlying study attrition remains part of the source dataset; not newly reconciled.
- confounding
- Ecological associations, uncontrolled change scores, heterogeneous programmes and imputation limit inference. Missing predictors were imputed with k-nearest neighbors (k=5); narrative study-flow arithmetic and sexual-violence study totals are inconsistent, so exact subsidiary counts and treatment rankings are not adopted.
- adverse Findings
- No reliable pooled adverse-event estimate; positive pre/post regression coefficients are not causal estimates of treatment-induced harm.
- transfer Limits
- Ecological associations, uncontrolled change scores, heterogeneous programmes and imputation limit inference. Missing predictors were imputed with k-nearest neighbors (k=5); narrative study-flow arithmetic and sexual-violence study totals are inconsistent, so exact subsidiary counts and treatment rankings are not adopted.
- jadad
- not applicable
- access
- level
- selected-methods
- source URLs
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10294456/ · https://www.ebi.ac.uk/europepmc/webservices/rest/PMC10294456/fullTextXML · https://api.crossref.org/works/10.5093%2Fpi2023a6
- retrieved At
- 2026-10-30T08:08:17.168330+00:00
- sections Inspected
Methods: prior data, missing-data handling, normalization and meta-regression models · Results: outcome, treatment and violence-variable analyses · Discussion and ecological-inference limitations
- sources
- url
- https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10294456/
- type
- Open-access article archived in PMC; XML retrieved through Europe PMC
- retrieved At
- 2026-10-30T08:08:17.168330+00:00
- identity Verified
- true
- notes
- Methods and results sections listed in access.sectionsInspected were inspected. Whole-article formal appraisal and numerical reconstruction are not claimed.
- url
- https://api.crossref.org/works/10.5093%2Fpi2023a6
- type
- Publisher-deposited Crossref bibliographic metadata
- retrieved At
- 2026-10-30T08:12:26.081134+00:00
- identity Verified
- true
- notes
- DOI and normalized title match retained Europe PMC metadata.
- publication Status
- status
- Published journal article
- correction Retraction Check
- Crossref relation and update-to metadata inspected; no linked correction or retraction was returned. Retained Europe PMC publication types: research-article, Journal Article.
- uncertainty
- This is not an exhaustive correction/retraction search.
- recommendation Rationale
- Adds a methodological audit of a previously included evidence base; it is not new independent trial evidence or a basis for individualized treatment ranking.
- review
- status
- pending
- reviewer
- Not recorded
- assessment Status
- assessed
- assessment Notes
- Bounded source-supported assessment of selected methods and results, not complete full-text appraisal. Pooled studies are never added to the primary-study count. This is explicitly a reanalysis of the prior Karakurt 2019 evidence base, linked to dv-reviews-31415863; it adds one publication but not a new primary trial or independent review evidence base.
- review Ready
- true
- review Readiness
- ai-editorial-audit-complete-release-pending
- source Evidence Hashes
- article XMLSHA256
- 215c851e364113ed2485155b8132f3a3cc82e43c87ff047a827bde7eeff78575
- crossref SHA256
- 07c0bc9551cba230ce570fc5aa83015151338f5552ed15465fad9fef6defe81a
- 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
- Not recorded
- prior Revision
- Not recorded
- prior Source
- continuation-10
- source Verification
- id
- dv-reviews-cont-37383644
- doi
- 10.5093/pi2023a6
- pmid
- 37383644
- fresh Metadata
- Europe PMC core
- metadata Retrieved
- true
- metadata SHA256
- beb628f74c56094aa06f93c19aec0c0b36b8b624d735b34b12c7ed40efe23793
- claim Check
- Headline finding/design/limitations compared with indexed abstract or accessible primary evidence; retained methods amendments separately adjudicated.
- sources
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10294456/ · https://api.crossref.org/works/10.5093%2Fpi2023a6
- 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 or secondary meta-regression; this publication does not randomize participants. Included-study design labels do not confer trial crosses.
- sources
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10294456/ · https://api.crossref.org/works/10.5093%2Fpi2023a6
- review Scope
- selected-methods
- paper Trust Assessment
- scope
- Paper
- status
- assessed
- score
- 1
- randomized Controlled Trial
- false
- peer Reviewed
- true
- blinding
- not-applicable
- basis
- Evidence syntheses receive no trial-design crosses.
- sources
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10294456/ · https://api.crossref.org/works/10.5093%2Fpi2023a6
- review Scope
- selected-methods
- human Approval
- false
- display Crosses
- 0
- masking Roles
- participants
- Not applicable to this evidence-synthesis publication; primary-trial masking was not newly verified.
- providers
- Not applicable to this evidence-synthesis publication; primary-trial masking was not newly verified.
- assessors
- Not applicable to this evidence-synthesis publication; primary-trial masking was not newly verified.
- analysts
- Not applicable to this evidence-synthesis publication; primary-trial masking was not newly verified.
- jadad
- status
- not-applicable
- score
- Not recorded
- evidence
- population
- relation
- direct
- population
- Male IPV perpetrators represented in a prior intervention-study dataset
- exposure Evidence
- Eligibility and study population descriptions explicitly concern IPV perpetrators, IPV-exposed survivors/children, or IPV prevention.
- rationale
- Adds a methodological audit of a previously included evidence base; it is not new independent trial evidence or a basis for individualized treatment ranking.
- transfer Limit
- Ecological associations, uncontrolled change scores, heterogeneous programmes and imputation limit inference. Missing predictors were imputed with k-nearest neighbors (k=5); narrative study-flow arithmetic and sexual-violence study totals are inconsistent, so exact subsidiary counts and treatment rankings are not adopted.
- intervention
- description
- Study-level combinations of CBT, substance-use treatment, motivational work and other perpetrator programme components.
- dose
- Varied by source study; no shared regimen.
- provider
- Not established from the inspected source sections.
- comparator
- Within-study pre/post mean changes and variance changes, related to study-level treatment indicators; not a randomized comparison of treatment components.
- outcomes
- name
- Physical, psychological and sexual IPV change
- follow Up
- Source study pre/post periods
- result
- Study-level associations vary by baseline pattern and treatment coding
- effect Estimate
- Not recorded
- uncertainty
- No patient-level or randomized comparative efficacy estimate is inferred.
- primary Status
- Review outcome; no participant-randomized trial conducted by this publication.
- name
- Variance change
- follow Up
- Source study pre/post periods
- result
- Reported associations in within-study outcome variability
- effect Estimate
- Not recorded
- uncertainty
- Not an outcome demonstrating reduced partner harm.
- primary Status
- Review outcome; no participant-randomized trial conducted by this publication.
- access
- level
- selected-methods
- source URLs
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10294456/ · https://www.ebi.ac.uk/europepmc/webservices/rest/PMC10294456/fullTextXML · https://api.crossref.org/works/10.5093%2Fpi2023a6
- retrieved At
- 2026-10-30T08:08:17.168330+00:00
- sections Inspected
Methods: prior data, missing-data handling, normalization and meta-regression models · Results: outcome, treatment and violence-variable analyses · Discussion and ecological-inference limitations
- citation Snapshot
- count
- Not recorded
- source
- Not recorded
- retrieved At
- Not recorded
- status
- not-assessed
- provenance
- Discovered by AI
- content Hash
- d7d8106bcd70b14c16d5c56227712fbc51d8b10d0f7d8ef60d97f159f8d74db0
- revision
- audit-r2-d7d8106bcd70
- 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
- Secondary meta-regression of previously reviewed intervention studies
- intervention
- Study-level combinations of CBT, substance-use treatment, motivational work and other perpetrator programme components. Varied by source study; no shared regimen.
- comparator
- Within-study pre/post mean changes and variance changes, related to study-level treatment indicators; not a randomized comparison of treatment components.
- sample
- 16 studies reused from Karakurt et al. 2019; no new eligible studies added by the update search. Participant total not established in this assessment.
- measurement
- Physical, psychological and sexual IPV change; Variance change
- timing
- Source study pre/post periods
- trial Id
- relationship Note
- Adds a methodological audit of a previously included evidence base; it is not new independent trial evidence or a basis for individualized treatment ranking. Ecological associations, uncontrolled change scores, heterogeneous programmes and imputation limit inference. Missing predictors were imputed with k-nearest neighbors (k=5); narrative study-flow arithmetic and sexual-violence study totals are inconsistent, so exact subsidiary counts and treatment rankings are not adopted.
- measured Genes
- None recorded
- pathways
- None recorded
- source Access
- level
- selected-methods
- source URLs
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10294456/ · https://www.ebi.ac.uk/europepmc/webservices/rest/PMC10294456/fullTextXML · https://api.crossref.org/works/10.5093%2Fpi2023a6
- retrieved At
- 2026-10-30T08:08:17.168330+00:00
- sections Inspected
Methods: prior data, missing-data handling, normalization and meta-regression models · Results: outcome, treatment and violence-variable analyses · Discussion and ecological-inference limitations
- outcomes
- name
- Physical, psychological and sexual IPV change
- follow Up
- Source study pre/post periods
- result
- Study-level associations vary by baseline pattern and treatment coding
- effect Estimate
- Not recorded
- uncertainty
- No patient-level or randomized comparative efficacy estimate is inferred.
- primary Status
- Review outcome; no participant-randomized trial conducted by this publication.
- name
- Variance change
- follow Up
- Source study pre/post periods
- result
- Reported associations in within-study outcome variability
- effect Estimate
- Not recorded
- uncertainty
- Not an outcome demonstrating reduced partner harm.
- primary Status
- Review outcome; no participant-randomized trial conducted by this publication.
- quality
- risk Of Bias
- No new independent trial risk-of-bias assessment was identified in inspected methods. Reuses the prior meta-analysis dataset; qualitative causal claims exceed what these study-level associations establish.
- attrition
- Underlying study attrition remains part of the source dataset; not newly reconciled.
- confounding
- Ecological associations, uncontrolled change scores, heterogeneous programmes and imputation limit inference. Missing predictors were imputed with k-nearest neighbors (k=5); narrative study-flow arithmetic and sexual-violence study totals are inconsistent, so exact subsidiary counts and treatment rankings are not adopted.
- adverse Findings
- No reliable pooled adverse-event estimate; positive pre/post regression coefficients are not causal estimates of treatment-induced harm.
- transfer Limits
- Ecological associations, uncontrolled change scores, heterogeneous programmes and imputation limit inference. Missing predictors were imputed with k-nearest neighbors (k=5); narrative study-flow arithmetic and sexual-violence study totals are inconsistent, so exact subsidiary counts and treatment rankings are not adopted.
- jadad
- not applicable
- masking Roles
- participants
- Not applicable to this evidence-synthesis publication; primary-trial masking was not newly verified.
- providers
- Not applicable to this evidence-synthesis publication; primary-trial masking was not newly verified.
- assessors
- Not applicable to this evidence-synthesis publication; primary-trial masking was not newly verified.
- analysts
- Not applicable to this evidence-synthesis publication; primary-trial masking was not newly verified.
- population
- relation
- direct
- population
- Male IPV perpetrators represented in a prior intervention-study dataset
- exposure Evidence
- Eligibility and study population descriptions explicitly concern IPV perpetrators, IPV-exposed survivors/children, or IPV prevention.
- rationale
- Adds a methodological audit of a previously included evidence base; it is not new independent trial evidence or a basis for individualized treatment ranking.
- transfer Limit
- Ecological associations, uncontrolled change scores, heterogeneous programmes and imputation limit inference. Missing predictors were imputed with k-nearest neighbors (k=5); narrative study-flow arithmetic and sexual-violence study totals are inconsistent, so exact subsidiary counts and treatment rankings are not adopted.
- jadad
- status
- not-applicable
- score
- Not recorded
- condition Evidence
- None recorded
- conditions
- None recorded
- topic Trust Scores
2
- full Text
- status
- not-indexed
- retrieval Available
- false