Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2023 Apr 3:1-15.
doi: 10.1007/s10896-023-00541-7. Online ahead of print.

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

Karen Schucan Bird  1 , Nicola Stokes  2 , Martha Tomlinson  2 , Carol Rivas  1
Affiliations

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

Karen Schucan Bird et al. J Fam Violence. .

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 Research Integrity Framework (ethical guidelines for domestic abuse research) are used to interrogate the systematic review process. To do so, the Framework 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.

Keywords: Ethics; Informal social support; Methodology; Research integrity; Systematic review.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict of interestNicola Stokes and Martha Tomlinson were/are employed at SafeLives, a UK-wide charity dedicated to ending domestic abuse. Karen Schucan Bird and Carol Rivas have no conflicts of interest with respect to the content of the article.

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Addis, S., & Snowdon, L. (2021). What Works to Prevent Violence against Women, Domestic Abuse and Sexual Violence (VAWDASV) Systematic Evidence Assessment. Wales Violence Prevention Unit. https://www.violencepreventionwales.co.uk/cms-assets/research/What-Works...
    1. Aljomaie HAH, Hollingdrake O, Cruz AA, Currie J. A scoping review of the healthcare provided by nurses to people experiencing domestic violence in primary health care settings. International Journal of Nursing Studies Advances. 2022;4:100068. doi: 10.1016/j.ijnsa.2022.100068. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Allen, G., & Israel, M. (2018). Moving beyond Regulatory Compliance: Building Institutional support for ethical reflection in Research. In R. Iphofen, & M. Tolich (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of qualitative Research Ethics (pp. 276–287). SAGE Publications Ltd. 10.4135/9781526435446.n19.
    1. Anderson EJ, Krause KC, Krause M, Welter C, McClelland A, Garcia DJ, Ernst DO, Lopez K, Koss MP. Web-based and mHealth interventions for intimate Partner Violence victimization Prevention: A systematic review. Trauma Violence & Abuse. 2021;22(4):870–884. doi: 10.1177/1524838019888889. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Arai, L., Shaw, A., Feder, G., Howarth, E., MacMillan, H., Moore, T. H. M., Stanley, N., & Gregory, A. (2021). Hope, agency, and the lived experience of violence: A qualitative systematic review of children’s perspectives on domestic violence and abuse. Trauma, Violence, & Abuse, 22(3), 427–438. 10.1177/1524838019849582 - PMC - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources