Research or intervention or both? Women's changes after participation in a longitudinal study about intimate partner violence

A Review of Intimate Partner Violence Interventions Relevant to Women During the COVID-19 Pandemic

Women have experienced increased rates of intimate partner violence (IPV) since the onset of the COVID-19 global pandemic, and at the same time requirements for physical distancing and/or remote delivery of services have created challenges in accessing services. We synthesized research evidence from 4 systematic reviews and 20 individual studies to address how IPV interventions can be adapted within the context of the pandemic. As many interventions have been delivered via various technologies, access to technology is of particular importance during the pandemic. Our results can inform the provision of services during the remainder of the COVID-19 pandemic including how to support women who have little access to in-person services.

Women's Participation in Research on Intimate Partner Violence: Findings on Recruitment, Retention, and Participants' Experiences

BACKGROUND

Research on intimate partner violence (IPV) faces unique challenges to recruitment and retention. Little is known about successful strategies for recruiting and retaining in research women who have experienced IPV, and their experiences of research participation.

PURPOSE

This article presents findings on recruitment, retention, and research participation experiences from a longitudinal observational study of IPV among women receiving care through the Veterans Health Administration.

METHODS

Administrative tracking data were analyzed to identify strengths, challenges, and outcomes of multiple recruitment strategies for an observational study of women patients who had experienced past-year IPV. Qualitative interviews with a purposively selected subset of the larger sample were used to identify motivations for and experiences of study participation.

RESULTS

Of the total sample (N = 169), 92.3% were recruited via direct outreach by the research team (63.3% via letter, 29.0% in person), compared with provider or patient self-referral (3.6% and 4.1%, respectively); 88% returned for a follow-up assessment. In qualitative interviews (n = 50), participants expressed a desire to help others as a primary motivation for study participation. Although some participants experienced emotional strain during or after study visits, they also expressed perceiving value in sharing their experiences, and several participants found the experience personally beneficial. Participants expressed that disclosure was facilitated by interviewers' empathic and neutral stance, as well as the relative anonymity and time-limited nature of the research relationship.

CONCLUSIONS

Direct outreach to women Veterans Health Administration patients to participate in research interviews about IPV experience was feasible and effective, and proved more fruitful for recruitment than reliance on provider or patient self-referral. Women who have experienced IPV may welcome opportunities to contribute to improvements in care through participation in interviews.