Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://anrows.intersearch.com.au/anrowsjspui/handle/1/20112
Record ID: 535143f1-5428-4c90-b4bb-932ebbf8ca8a
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorChung, Donnaen
dc.contributor.authorCordier, Reinieen
dc.contributor.authorSpeyer, Reneeen
dc.contributor.authorWilkes-Gillan, Sarahen
dc.date.accessioned2022-06-30T23:51:00Z-
dc.date.available2022-06-30T23:51:00Z-
dc.date.issued2019en
dc.identifier.urihttps://anrows.intersearch.com.au/anrowsjspui/handle/1/20112-
dc.description.abstractPreventing and reducing domestic violence is a national and international social priority. Civil law protection orders (POs) have been the primary legal response to domestic violence internationally for a number of decades. However, evidence of their effectiveness is mixed due to variations in application within and across countries and variable quality of the research with most studies at high risk of bias. The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the effectiveness of POs in reducing violation rates of domestic violence, compare violation rates reported by victims and police reports, and identify factors that influence violation and reoffense. Two electronic databases were searched; two independent researchers screened abstracts. Data were collected and assessed methodologically, using the Kmet Checklist Appraisal Tool and National Health and Medical Research Council Hierarchy of Evidence. Twenty-five studies that evaluated the effectiveness of POs in reducing recidivism in domestic violence met the eligibility criteria. Meta-analyses of weighted means of violation in the studies were conducted. Violation rates were found to be higher for victim reports compared with police reports. Violation rates were reduced when POs used in combination with arrests. PO violation rates were lower among perpetrators without histories of arrest for committing violence, perpetrators not engaging in stalking, and where couples have had medium to high incomes. There is no consensus among the studies about what the most appropriate methodology is to measure PO effectiveness. Future research should establish a more unified approach to evaluating the effectiveness and violations of POs.en
dc.languageenen
dc.publisherSage Publicationsen
dc.relation.ispartofTrauma, Violence, & Abuseen
dc.titleThe Effectiveness of Protection Orders in Reducing Recidivism in Domestic Violence: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysisen
dc.typeReporten
dc.identifier.doihttps://doi.org/10.1177/1524838019882361en
dc.identifier.catalogid15948en
dc.subject.keywordInvalid URLen
dc.subject.keywordnew_recorden
dc.identifier.sourceTrauma, Violence, & Abuseen
dc.date.entered2020-01-15en
Appears in Collections:Reports

Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.


Items in ANROWS library are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

Google Media

Google ScholarTM

Who's citing