Help seeking by male victims of domestic violence and abuse: an example of an integrated mixed methods synthesis of systematic review evidence defining methodological terms.
Domestic violence
Help seeking
Male victims
Mixed methods
Systematic review evidence
Journal
BMC health services research
ISSN: 1472-6963
Titre abrégé: BMC Health Serv Res
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101088677
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
26 Nov 2020
26 Nov 2020
Historique:
received:
23
04
2020
accepted:
16
11
2020
entrez:
27
11
2020
pubmed:
28
11
2020
medline:
15
5
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Domestic violence and abuse is a violation of human rights which damages the health and wellbeing of victims, their families and their friends. There has been less research on the experiences and support needs of male victims than those of women. Historically research on men's experiences has not focused on what constitutes effective, needs-led service provision. The aim of this paper was to conduct an integrated mixed methods synthesis of systematic review evidence on the topic of help-seeking by male victims of domestic violence and abuse. An integrated mixed methods synthesis approach was taken to enhance our understanding of the complex phenomenon of help seeking by, and service provision to male victims. This process also identifies gaps in the evidence. Using previously identified systematic review data; mixed methods data from four primary-level service evaluation studies, along with expert and patient consultation were used to develop research propositions. Primary-level qualitative interview and survey data from 12 studies of men experiences were mapped onto the propositions to support them. Fourteen propositions were composed. Seven propositions were supported or at least partly supported by the qualitative data. These supported propositions were used to make recommendations for policy and practice particularly concerning service preferences of male victims. The remaining seven propositions were not specifically supported by the qualitative data. These unsupported propositions were used to develop research recommendations concerning the need to further understand the potential blurred boundaries of victim-perpetrator, hybrid perpetrator-victim experiences, men who are/have been victims of childhood sexual abuse and determining the level of risk for men. They also highlight the need to produce better guidance for the response of the police & the criminal justice system. Finally, they highlight the need to produce the most appropriate service for men in terms of access, linkage, substance/alcohol abuse, mental health, sexuality, and race. Integrated mixed-methods synthesis of systematic review evidence is a relatively novel approach. This approach can lead to recommendations for policy and practice as well as highlighting gaps in the research agenda as shown in this example.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Domestic violence and abuse is a violation of human rights which damages the health and wellbeing of victims, their families and their friends. There has been less research on the experiences and support needs of male victims than those of women. Historically research on men's experiences has not focused on what constitutes effective, needs-led service provision. The aim of this paper was to conduct an integrated mixed methods synthesis of systematic review evidence on the topic of help-seeking by male victims of domestic violence and abuse.
METHODS
METHODS
An integrated mixed methods synthesis approach was taken to enhance our understanding of the complex phenomenon of help seeking by, and service provision to male victims. This process also identifies gaps in the evidence. Using previously identified systematic review data; mixed methods data from four primary-level service evaluation studies, along with expert and patient consultation were used to develop research propositions. Primary-level qualitative interview and survey data from 12 studies of men experiences were mapped onto the propositions to support them.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Fourteen propositions were composed. Seven propositions were supported or at least partly supported by the qualitative data. These supported propositions were used to make recommendations for policy and practice particularly concerning service preferences of male victims. The remaining seven propositions were not specifically supported by the qualitative data. These unsupported propositions were used to develop research recommendations concerning the need to further understand the potential blurred boundaries of victim-perpetrator, hybrid perpetrator-victim experiences, men who are/have been victims of childhood sexual abuse and determining the level of risk for men. They also highlight the need to produce better guidance for the response of the police & the criminal justice system. Finally, they highlight the need to produce the most appropriate service for men in terms of access, linkage, substance/alcohol abuse, mental health, sexuality, and race.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
Integrated mixed-methods synthesis of systematic review evidence is a relatively novel approach. This approach can lead to recommendations for policy and practice as well as highlighting gaps in the research agenda as shown in this example.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33243236
doi: 10.1186/s12913-020-05931-x
pii: 10.1186/s12913-020-05931-x
pmc: PMC7689389
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Systematic Review
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1085Subventions
Organisme : Department of Health
ID : RP-PG-0614-20012
Pays : United Kingdom
Organisme : Programme Grants for Applied Research
ID : PGfAR, RP-PG-0614-20012
Références
J Adv Nurs. 2017 Jan;73(1):5-20
pubmed: 27461976
Int J Offender Ther Comp Criminol. 2020 May 28;:306624X20919710
pubmed: 32463322
J Health Serv Res Policy. 2005 Jan;10(1):45-53
pubmed: 15667704
J Interpers Violence. 2020 May 29;:886260520922342
pubmed: 32468917
Lancet. 2011 Nov 19;378(9805):1788-95
pubmed: 22000683
Partner Abuse. 2010 Jan 01;1(3):286-313
pubmed: 20686677
BMJ Open. 2019 Jun 11;9(6):e021960
pubmed: 31186243
Violence Vict. 2013;28(1):161-77
pubmed: 23520838
BMJ Open. 2016 Jun 20;6(6):e010847
pubmed: 27324711
Cancer Treat Rev. 2015 Feb;41(2):197-215
pubmed: 25579752
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013 Oct 08;(10):CD010414
pubmed: 24101553