Trends in outcomes used to measure the effectiveness of UK-based support interventions and services targeted at adults with experience of domestic and sexual violence and abuse: A scoping review.

Abstract

Objectives: In the UK, a range of support services and interventions are available to people who have experienced or perpetrated domestic and sexual violence and abuse (DSVA). However, it is currently not clear which outcomes and outcome measures are used to assess their effectiveness. The objective of this review is to summarise, map and identify trends in outcome measures in evaluations and reports of DSVA services and interventions in the UK. Design: Scoping review Data sources: MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Social Policy and Practice, ASSIA, IBSS, Sociological abstracts and SSCI electronic databases were searched from inception until 21st June 2022. Grey literature sources were identified and searched. Eligibility: We included randomised controlled trials, non-randomised comparative studies, pre-post studies and service evaluations, with at least one outcome relating to the effectiveness of the support intervention or service for people who have experienced and/or perpetrated DSVA. Outcomes had to be assessed at baseline and at least one more time-point, or compared to a comparison group. Charting methods: Outcome measures were extracted, iteratively thematically grouped into categories, domains and subdomains, and trends were explored. Results: 80 studies reporting 87 interventions or services were included. A total of 426 outcome measures were extracted, of which 200 were used more than once. The most commonly reported subdomain was DSVA perpetration, and cessation of abuse according to the Severity of Abuse Grid was the most common individual outcome. Analysis of temporal trends showed that the number of studies and outcomes used has increased since the 1990s. Conclusions: Our findings highlight inconsistencies between studies in outcome measurement. The increase in the number of studies and variety of measures suggests that as evaluation of these services and interventions matures, there is an increased need for a core of common, reliable metrics to aid comparability. Protocol registration: https://osf.io/frh2e

The Concept and Measurement of Interpersonal Violence in Specialist Services Data: Inconsistencies, Outcomes and the Challenges of Synthesising Evidence

“…We carried out a review of the literature in terms of the conceptual and theoretical studies discussing various issues surrounding interpersonal violence, its measurement and data within the specialist services context, as well as drawing on studies that have used this administrative and evaluative data; with a focus, where possible, on the UK context. This review stems from wider synthesis work being carried out in this area, primarily the aforementioned systematic scoping review that aimed to explore the outcomes currently being used by DSVA services and interventions when assessing effectiveness (Carlisle et al 2023). Whilst carrying out this work, several challenges were encountered that form the basis for this review.…”

“…However, such information is sometimes recorded in data systems as string variables in free-text fields, meaning considerable data management is needed to undertake statistical analysis (Green et al 2015). Quantitative data collected by specialist services may also include continuous measures such as mean scores on the Beck depression inventory (Beck et al 1987) or Rosenberg self-esteem scale (Rosenberg 1965), or categorical measures such as the severity-of-abuse grid (Campbell and Soeken 1999); which was the most commonly identified outcome measure in a recent scoping review (Carlisle et al 2023). Such measures are more commonly administered for evaluations rather than being included in routine administrative datasets.…”

“…Furthermore, specialist services often do not use standardised measures, opting instead for single-item measures that are also often inconsistent across services. Indeed, the previously mentioned scoping review identified 283 different outcome measures used in evaluations and reports of support services and interventions, which included validated questionnaires, unvalidated questionnaires and single-item questions (Carlisle et al 2023). Whilst complete uniformity is not plausible because of differing prioritisation across the sector, improved agreement on the specific measures used would be beneficial in aiding comparisons and syntheses.…”

“…A few exist (e.g., the conflict tactics scale (CTS); Straus 1979), but they are seemingly rarely utilised. For instance, of the 426 outcomes and 87 interventions and services identified in the previously described scoping review, none utilised the CTS (Carlisle et al 2023).…”

“…The measurement of violence by specialist services is varied, with no real consensus on what the best methodologies are. Indeed, in a recent systematic scoping review of the outcomes utilised in evaluations and reports of support services and interventions for those who have experienced DSVA, 11 distinct categories of outcomes and 426 outcome measures were identified, of which fewer than half had been used in more than one publication (Carlisle et al 2023). This illustrates the inconsistencies within the sector in terms of both what and how to measure when it comes to violence.…”