2013
DOI: 10.1177/1066480713505056
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Intimate Partner Violence

Abstract: placebo gels were rubbed onto the skin in the same way as active treatments, we found that active treatments were significantly better than placebo. Creating double blind conditions in trials of counter irritants can be problematic as rubefacients irritate the skin whereas inactive placebos do not. Some studies allowed for this by removing the principle ingredient from the treatment, leaving a placebo vehicle containing some other potentially irritant ingredients. Although the number needed to treat for combin… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
7
0

Year Published

2014
2014
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
7
2
1

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 30 publications
(8 citation statements)
references
References 48 publications
(62 reference statements)
0
7
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Researchers (McCollum & Stith, 2008; Stith & McCollum, 2011; Stith et al, 2012) have demonstrated that conjoint treatment for IPV can be both safe and effective (Antunes-Alves & de Stefano, 2014; Stith & McCollum, 2011). With careful screening to ensure IPV is not severe, rigorous training of providers, and ongoing risk assessment and safety planning, couples can reduce IPV and improve their relationship through enhanced communication and problem-solving skills (Antunes-Alves & de Stefano, 2014; Armenti & Babcock, 2016; Hurless & Cottone, 2018). A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials of conjoint therapies for IPV showed that conjoint interventions resulted in significantly greater reductions in IPV than did individual treatments and control conditions (Karakurt et al, 2016).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Researchers (McCollum & Stith, 2008; Stith & McCollum, 2011; Stith et al, 2012) have demonstrated that conjoint treatment for IPV can be both safe and effective (Antunes-Alves & de Stefano, 2014; Stith & McCollum, 2011). With careful screening to ensure IPV is not severe, rigorous training of providers, and ongoing risk assessment and safety planning, couples can reduce IPV and improve their relationship through enhanced communication and problem-solving skills (Antunes-Alves & de Stefano, 2014; Armenti & Babcock, 2016; Hurless & Cottone, 2018). A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials of conjoint therapies for IPV showed that conjoint interventions resulted in significantly greater reductions in IPV than did individual treatments and control conditions (Karakurt et al, 2016).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Even though couple therapy is not encouraged, conjoint couple therapy is an appropriate intervention for IPV if certain conditions are present as determined by the clinician. 23 Couple therapists should undergo structured training in systemic therapy and have practice skills and cultural competency while dealing with cases of IPV. Conjoint couple therapy should be taken into consideration only after careful assessment of the appropriateness of couple therapy for that particular couple and after taking necessary precautions to ensure the safety of both partners.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Critics also argue that conjoint approaches encourage honest and open disclosure, which, in turn, could lead to conflict in therapy sessions that could escalate to violence outside of therapy. However, given the interactional and bidirectional nature of some types of violence, carefully screened and controlled partner-involved treatments may have advantages for couples who engage in non-severe forms of IPV [13].…”
Section: Conjoint Therapymentioning
confidence: 99%