Cost-effectiveness of a programme to detect and provide better care for female victims of intimate partner violence

Journal of Health Services Research and Policy

Volumn 15, Issue 3, 2010, Pages 143-149

  Norman, Richard ^a   Spencer, Anne ^b   Eldridge, Sandra ^c   Feder, Gene ^d  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY SYDNEY   (Australia)

^b QUEEN MARY UNIVERSITY OF LONDON   (United Kingdom)

^c QUEEN MARY UNIVERSITY OF LONDON   (United Kingdom)

^d UNIVERSITY OF BRISTOL   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; COST; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; COST OF ILLNESS; DOMESTIC VIOLENCE; EDUCATION; FEMALE; HIDDEN MARKOV MODEL; HUMAN; INTIMATE PARTNER VIOLENCE; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MEDICAL EDUCATION; MULTICENTER STUDY; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PATIENT IDENTIFICATION; PATIENT REFERRAL; PREVALENCE; PRIMARY MEDICAL CARE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY ADJUSTED LIFE YEAR; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS; SUPPORT GROUP; SURVIVOR; TRAINING; UNITED KINGDOM;

COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; FAMILY PRACTICE; FEMALE; GREAT BRITAIN; HEALTH CARE COSTS; HUMANS; MARKOV CHAINS; PHYSICIANS, FAMILY; PROGRAM EVALUATION; QUALITY-ADJUSTED LIFE YEARS; REFERRAL AND CONSULTATION; SOCIAL SUPPORT; SPOUSE ABUSE;

EID: 77954276078     PISSN: 13558196     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1258/jhsrp.2009.009032     Document Type: Article

References (23)

1. Campbell JC. Health consequences of intimate partner violence. Lancet 2002;359:1331-6
2. Walby S. The Cost of Domestic Violence: Update 2009. Lancaster: Lancaster University, 2009
3. Feder GS, Hutson M, Ramsay J, Taket AR.Women exposed to intimate partner violence: Expectations and experiences when they encounter health care professionals: A meta-analysis of qualitative studies. Arch Intern Med 2006;166:22-37 (Pubitemid 43063838)
4. Feder G. Responding to intimate partner violence: What role for general practice? Br J Gen Pract 2006;56:243-4
5. Norman RP, Spencer A, Feder G. Cost-effectiveness analysis: What you always wanted to know but were afraid to ask. Family Violence Prevention and Health Practice (e-journal) 2007. See: http://endabuse.org/health/ejournal/ archive/1-5/cost-effective-analysis.php/
6. Drummond M, O'Brien BJ, Stoddart GL, Torrance GW. Methods for the Economic Evaluation of Health care Programmes. Oxford: Oxford Medical Publications, 2004
7. McFarlane J, Parker B, Soeken K, Bullock L. Assessing for abuse during pregnancy. Severity and frequency of injuries and associated entry into prenatal care. JAMA 1992;267:3176-8
8. Sohal H, Eldridge S, Feder G. The sensitivity and specificity of four questions (hark) to identify intimate partner violence: A diagnostic accuracy study in general practice. BMC Fam Pract 2007;8:49
9. Drummond MF, Jefferson TO. Guidelines for authors and peer reviewers of economic submissions to the bmj. The bmj economic evaluation working party. BMJ 1996;313:275-83
10. Philips Z, Ginnelly L, Sculpher M, et al. Review of guidelines for good practice in decision-analytic modelling in health technology assessment. Health Technol Assess 2004;8:iii-iv, ix-xi, 1-158
11. Richardson J, Coid J, Petruckevitch A, Chung WS, Moorey S, Feder G. Identifying domestic violence: Cross sectional study in primary care. BMJ 2002;324:274
12. Bybee DI, Sullivan CM. The process through which an advocacy intervention resulted in positive change for battered women over time. Am J Community Psychol 2002;30:103-32
13. Feder G, Ramsay J, Dunne D, et al. How far does screening women for domestic (partner) violence in different healthcare settings meet criteria for a screening programme? Systematic reviews of nine UK national screening committee criteria. Health Technol Assess 2009;13:iii-iv, xi-xiii, 1-113, 37-347
14. Griffiths C, Brook A, Wild S, Fischbacher C. Mortality by Country of Birth in England and Wales, 2001-2003. London: ONS, 2004
15. Home Office. Criminal Statistics England and Wales 2001. London: ONS, 2002
16. Curtis L, Netten A. Unit Costs of Health and Social Care. Canterbury: University of Canterbury, 2005
17. Walby S. The Cost of Domestic Violence. London: Women and Equality Unit, Department of Trade and Industry, 2004
18. Wittenberg E, Lichter EL, Ganz ML, McCloskey LA. Community preferences for health states associated with intimate partner violence. Med Care 2006;44:738-44 (Pubitemid 44284264)
19. Hamberger LK, Saunders DG, Hovey M. Prevalence of domestic violence in community practice and rate of physician inquiry. Fam Med 1992;24:283-7
20. Culyer AJ, McCabe C, Briggs A, Claxton K, Baxton M, Akehurst R, et al. Searching for a threshold, not setting one: the role of the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellent. J Health Serv Res Policy 2007;12:51-6
21. Stark E. Coercive Control: How Men Entrap Women in Personal Life. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007
22. Ramsay J, Carter Y, Davidson L, et al. Advocacy interventions to reduce or eliminate violence and promote the physical and psychosocial well-being of women who experience intimate partner abuse. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2009;(3):CD005043
23. Welton N, Ades A, Caldwell D, Peters TJ. Research prioritisation based on expected value of partial perfect information: A case study on interventions to increase uptake of breast cancer screening. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society 2008;171:807-41