Ethically Driven and Methodologically Tailored: Setting the Agenda for Systematic Reviews in Domestic Violence and Abuse

Overview

Journal J Fam Violence

Date 2023 Jun 26

PMID 37358972

Authors

Karen Schucan Bird

Nicola Stokes

Martha Tomlinson

Carol Rivas

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Purpose: Systematic reviews have an important, and growing, role to play in the global evidence eco-system of domestic violence and abuse. Alongside substantive contributions to knowledge, such reviews stimulate debates about ethical reviewing practices and the importance of tailoring methods to the nuances of the field. This paper aims to pinpoint a set of ethical and methodological priorities to guide and enhance review practices specifically in the field of domestic abuse.

Method: The five Pillars of the (ethical guidelines for domestic abuse research) are used to interrogate the systematic review process. To do so, the is retrospectively applied to a recently completed systematic review in domestic abuse. The review included a rapid systematic map and in-depth analysis of interventions aimed at creating or enhancing informal support and social networks for victim-survivors of abuse.

Results: Ethical and methodological priorities for systematic reviews in domestic abuse include (1) Safety and wellbeing: maintaining the wellbeing of researchers and stakeholders, and appraising the ethics of included studies, (2) Transparency/ accountability: transparent reporting of research funding, aims and methods together with explicit consideration of authorship of outputs, (3) Equality, human rights and social justice: developing diverse review teams/ Advisory groups, and review methods that aim to search for, and report, diverse perspectives. Considering researcher positionality/ reflexivity in the review, (4) Engagement: collaboration with non-academic stakeholders and individuals with lived experience throughout the review process, (5) Research Ethics: independent ethical scrutiny of systematic review proposals with input from researchers with expertise in systematic reviews and domestic abuse.

Conclusion: Additional research is required to comprehensively examine the ethics of each stage of the review process. In the meantime, attention should be given to the underpinning ethical framework for our systematic review practices and the wider research infrastructure that governs reviews.

Citing Articles

Training Informal Supporters to Improve Responses to Victim-Survivors of Domestic Violence and Abuse: A Systematic Review.

Schucan Bird K, Stokes N, Rivas C, Tomlinson M, Delve M, Gordon L Trauma Violence Abuse. 2023; 25(2):1568-1584.

PMID: 37649408 PMC: 10913311. DOI: 10.1177/15248380231189191.

References

Sinko L, James R, Hughesdon K . Healing After Gender-Based Violence: A Qualitative Metasynthesis Using Meta-Ethnography. Trauma Violence Abuse. 2021; 23(4):1184-1203. DOI: 10.1177/1524838021991305. View

Auchter B, Backes B . NIJ's Program of Domestic Violence Research: collaborative efforts to build knowledge guided by safety for victims and accountability of perpetrators. Violence Against Women. 2013; 19(6):713-36. DOI: 10.1177/1077801213494703. View

Bender A . Ethics, Methods, and Measures in Intimate Partner Violence Research: The Current State of the Field. Violence Against Women. 2016; 23(11):1382-1413. DOI: 10.1177/1077801216658977. View

Munn Z, Stern C, Aromataris E, Lockwood C, Jordan Z . What kind of systematic review should I conduct? A proposed typology and guidance for systematic reviewers in the medical and health sciences. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2018; 18(1):5. PMC: 5761190. DOI: 10.1186/s12874-017-0468-4. View

Fontes L . Ethics in violence against women research: the sensitive, the dangerous, and the overlooked. Ethics Behav. 2005; 14(2):141-74. DOI: 10.1207/s15327019eb1402_4. View

Ragavan M, Thomas K, Fulambarker A, Zaricor J, Goodman L, Bair-Merritt M . Exploring the Needs and Lived Experiences of Racial and Ethnic Minority Domestic Violence Survivors Through Community-Based Participatory Research: A Systematic Review. Trauma Violence Abuse. 2018; 21(5):946-963. DOI: 10.1177/1524838018813204. View

Hong Q, Rees R, Sutcliffe K, Thomas J . Variations of mixed methods reviews approaches: A case study. Res Synth Methods. 2020; 11(6):795-811. DOI: 10.1002/jrsm.1437. View

Wathen C, MacMillan H . Interventions for violence against women: scientific review. JAMA. 2003; 289(5):589-600. DOI: 10.1001/jama.289.5.589. View

Anderson E, Krause K, Meyer Krause C, Welter A, McClelland D, Garcia D . Web-Based and mHealth Interventions for Intimate Partner Violence Victimization Prevention: A Systematic Review. Trauma Violence Abuse. 2019; 22(4):870-884. DOI: 10.1177/1524838019888889. View

10.

Grant M, Booth A . A typology of reviews: an analysis of 14 review types and associated methodologies. Health Info Libr J. 2009; 26(2):91-108. DOI: 10.1111/j.1471-1842.2009.00848.x. View

11.

Harwin N . Putting a stop to domestic violence in the United kingdom: challenges and opportunities. Violence Against Women. 2006; 12(6):556-67. DOI: 10.1177/1077801206289134. View

12.

Smith E, Donovan S, Beresford P, Manthorpe J, Brearley S, Sitzia J . Getting ready for user involvement in a systematic review. Health Expect. 2009; 12(2):197-208. PMC: 5060487. DOI: 10.1111/j.1369-7625.2009.00535.x. View

13.

Dukhanin V, Searle A, Zwerling A, Dowdy D, Taylor H, Merritt M . Integrating social justice concerns into economic evaluation for healthcare and public health: A systematic review. Soc Sci Med. 2017; 198:27-35. PMC: 6545595. DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2017.12.012. View

14.

Graham I, McCutcheon C, Kothari A . Exploring the frontiers of research co-production: the Integrated Knowledge Translation Research Network concept papers. Health Res Policy Syst. 2019; 17(1):88. PMC: 6876079. DOI: 10.1186/s12961-019-0501-7. View

15.

Gregory A, Williamson E, Feder G . The Impact on Informal Supporters of Domestic Violence Survivors: A Systematic Literature Review. Trauma Violence Abuse. 2016; 18(5):562-580. DOI: 10.1177/1524838016641919. View

16.

Mahood Q, Van Eerd D, Irvin E . Searching for grey literature for systematic reviews: challenges and benefits. Res Synth Methods. 2015; 5(3):221-34. DOI: 10.1002/jrsm.1106. View

17.

Labib K, Pizzolato D, Stappers P, Evans N, Lechner I, Widdershoven G . Using co-creation methods for research integrity guideline development - how, what, why and when?. Account Res. 2022; 31(6):531-556. DOI: 10.1080/08989621.2022.2154154. View

18.

Budde S, Schene P . Informal social support interventions and their role in violence prevention: an agenda for future evaluation. J Interpers Violence. 2004; 19(3):341-55. DOI: 10.1177/0886260503261157. View

19.

Trabold N, McMahon J, Alsobrooks S, Whitney S, Mittal M . A Systematic Review of Intimate Partner Violence Interventions: State of the Field and Implications for Practitioners. Trauma Violence Abuse. 2018; 21(2):311-325. DOI: 10.1177/1524838018767934. View

20.

Page M, McKenzie J, Bossuyt P, Boutron I, Hoffmann T, Mulrow C . The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ. 2021; 372:n71. PMC: 8005924. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.n71. View