A comparison of the types of screening tool administration methods used for the detection of intimate partner violence: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Intimate partner violence (IPV) is associated with significant health consequences for victims, including acute/chronic pain, depression, trauma, suicide, death, as well as physical, emotional, and mental harms for families and children. The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to assess the rate of IPV disclosure in adult women (>18 years of age) with the use of three different screening tool administration methods: computer-assisted self-administered screen, self-administered written screen, and face-to-face interview screen. A comprehensive literature search was conducted in the MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effectiveness, and the Cochrane library databases. We identified 746 potentially relevant articles; however, only 6 were randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and included for analysis. No significant differences were observed when women were screened in face-to-face interviews or with a self-administered written screen (Odds of disclosing: 1.02, 95% confidence interval [CI]: [0.77, 1.35]); however, a computer-assisted self-administered screen was found to increase the odds of IPV disclosure by 37% in comparison to a face-to-face interview screen (odds ratio: 0.63, 95% CI: [0.31, 1.30]). Disclosure of IPV was also 23% higher for computer-assisted self-administered screen in comparison to self-administered written screen (Odds of disclosure: 1.23, 95% CI: [0.0.92, 1.64]). The results of this review suggest that computer-assisted self-administered screens leads to higher rates of IPV disclosure in comparison to both face-to-face interview and self-administered written screens.