Methodological Challenges in Determining the Effectiveness of Intimate Partner Violence Perpetrator Programmes: A Systematic Review

Previous reviews of the effectiveness of intimate partner violence (IPV) programmes have shown mixed results. A systematic review with narrative synthesis was conducted to understand the methodological challenges in determining the effectiveness of IPV perpetrator programmes. A two-stage search strategy was employed. Firstly, a systematic search was conducted across six electronic databases: CINAHL, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Global Health, ASSIA, and Web of Science to identify systematic reviews exploring the effectiveness of interventions for IPV perpetrators. Secondly, primary studies from selected reviews were screened for inclusion. In total, 508 full-text manuscripts from 38 reviews were assessed against eligibility criteria. Twenty-six randomised controlled trials (RCTs) were included in this review. Methodological issues included the following: (1) short-term follow-up; (2) an over-reliance on perpetrator self-reported (physical) IPV outcomes with few studies collecting collateral victim IPV reports; (3) a lack of data presented on attendance and completion rates; and (4) changes in partners or having more than one partner were not considered in the methods or analysis. Perpetrators may under-report their abusive behaviour. No RCTs accounted for changes in relationship status nor reported on outcomes for new or multiple partners, potentially underestimating IPV recidivism as a result. Future evaluations of IPV perpetrator programmes should collect victim and perpetrator self-reported outcomes of different types of IPV victimisation and perpetration, respectively, alongside official re-offence data over the longer term. Evaluations should present data on treatment completion and dose response to enhance our understanding of what works for whom and to examine outcomes for new or multiple partners.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Trauma Violence & Abuse
Published
2026-04-21
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/15248380261437078
Primary Topic
Intimate Partner and Family Violence
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Methodological Challenges in Determining the Effectiveness of Intimate Partner Violence Perpetrator Programmes: A Systematic Review

Gail Gilchrist, Isobel Johnston, Emma Smith, Lucia Dahlby et al.
Trauma Violence & Abuse
Intimate Partner and Family Violence
article

Methodological Challenges in Determining the Effectiveness of Intimate Partner Violence Perpetrator Programmes: A Systematic Review

Gail Gilchrist, Isobel Johnston, Emma Smith, Lucia Dahlby, Steven Parkes, Elizabeth Gilchrist, Amanda L. Robinson, Sharmila Mahesh Kumar
article en

Abstract

Previous reviews of the effectiveness of intimate partner violence (IPV) programmes have shown mixed results. A systematic review with narrative synthesis was conducted to understand the methodological challenges in determining the effectiveness of IPV perpetrator programmes. A two-stage search strategy was employed. Firstly, a systematic search was conducted across six electronic databases: CINAHL, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Global Health, ASSIA, and Web of Science to identify systematic reviews exploring the effectiveness of interventions for IPV perpetrators. Secondly, primary studies from selected reviews were screened for inclusion. In total, 508 full-text manuscripts from 38 reviews were assessed against eligibility criteria. Twenty-six randomised controlled trials (RCTs) were included in this review. Methodological issues included the following: (1) short-term follow-up; (2) an over-reliance on perpetrator self-reported (physical) IPV outcomes with few studies collecting collateral victim IPV reports; (3) a lack of data presented on attendance and completion rates; and (4) changes in partners or having more than one partner were not considered in the methods or analysis. Perpetrators may under-report their abusive behaviour. No RCTs accounted for changes in relationship status nor reported on outcomes for new or multiple partners, potentially underestimating IPV recidivism as a result. Future evaluations of IPV perpetrator programmes should collect victim and perpetrator self-reported outcomes of different types of IPV victimisation and perpetration, respectively, alongside official re-offence data over the longer term. Evaluations should present data on treatment completion and dose response to enhance our understanding of what works for whom and to examine outcomes for new or multiple partners.

Trauma Violence & Abuse
King's College London (GB), University of Manchester (GB), Cardiff University (GB), University of Edinburgh (GB)
Public Health Research Programme
Gender equality
Openalex Percentile: Top 12%
Intimate Partner and Family Violence
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.