A translational research orientation to family violence

A meta-review of screening and treatment of electronic "addictions"

Concerns surrounding electronic addictions, an umbrella term including any clinically significant technology-based addictive problem, have increased as technology has advanced. Although researchers and clinicians have observed detrimental effects associated with excessive technology use, there is no agreed-on definition or set of criteria for these problems. The lack of a consistent understanding of electronic addictions has led to a lack of consistency in both assessment and treatment studies, precluding strong recommendations for effective screening and clinical intervention. This meta-review integrates findings from 22 systematic reviews and meta-analyses of electronic addictions to determine which measures and interventions may effectively measure and treat electronic addictions. We conducted a meta-review using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Findings suggest that although some measures may have good internal consistency and reliability among college students, there was a general lack of consistency in how measures were used across studies, making comparison difficult. Psychological and exercise-based interventions were shown to reduce symptoms of electronic addictions short-term, but no treatment was superior to others in overall symptom reduction. Most included reviews raise serious concerns about the lack of consensus on what constitutes an electronic addiction. Consequently, it was not possible to draw conclusions about the overall efficacy of any measurement tools or interventions. We provide suggestions for next steps to establish the phenomenology of electronic addictions before additional research on assessment and intervention is conducted.

Overlap of relationship distress and intimate partner violence in community samples

Mixed-gender couples presenting for couple therapy are at 2-3 times higher risk for physical intimate partner violence (IPV) than community couples. However, it is unclear if this elevation of relative risk is the same in the general population because relationship distress and treatment-seeking are often confounded. We used archival data from three representative U.S. civilian samples and one representative U.S. Air Force sample to test the hypothesis that clinically significant relationship distress is associated with increased risk of various forms of IPV. In these community samples, those in mixed-gender distressed relationships were at 2-3 times higher risk than those in nondistressed relationships for any physical IPV during the past year and at 3-6 times higher risk for clinically significant psychological and physical IPV during the past year. Given that the increase in IPV risk is similar for individuals in distressed community relationships and therapy-seeking relationships, the prior findings of the elevated rates of IPV in clinical samples are unlikely to be due to therapy-seeking. Although epidemiological risk involves statistical, not causal, associations, the increased co-occurrence of IPV in distressed mixed-gender couples fits with numerous theories of IPV and has implications for both screening and future research. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

Exploring the knowledge translation of domestic violence research: A literature review

There is growing recognition of the links between knowledge translation, policy and practice, particularly in the domestic violence research area. A literature review applying a systematic approach with a realist lens was the preferred methodology. The review answered the following question: What are the mechanisms of change in research networks which 'work' to support knowledge translation? A search of eight electronic databases for articles published between 1960 and 2018 was completed, with 2,999 records retrieved, 2,869 records excluded and 130 full-text articles screened for final inclusion in the review. The inclusion criteria were purposefully broad, including any study design or data source (including grey literature) with a focus on domestic violence knowledge translation. The analysis of included studies using a realist lens identified the mechanisms of change to support knowledge translation. A disaggregation of the included studies identified five theories focused on the following outcomes: (1) develop key messages, (2) flexible evidence use, (3) strengthen partnerships, (4) capacity building and (5) research utilisation. This review adds to our understanding of knowledge translation of domestic violence research. The mechanisms of change identified may support knowledge translation of research networks. Further research will focus on exploring the potential application of these program theories with a research network.

Research recognition, the first step to research literacy

Nurses are expected to use research as a form of evidence to support clinical practice. When selecting articles, some nurses may be unable to recognize the articles that report research. Research recognition is essential before study results may be used as evidence and translated into practice. The purpose of this article is to describe a typical research article, outline the major types of research, and identify the unique characteristics of research that may be used to recognize those articles that report research.

A translational model of research-practice integration

We propose a four-level, recursive Research-Practice Integration framework as a heuristic to (a) integrate and reflect on the articles in this Special Section as contributing to a bidirectional bridge between research and practice, and (b) consider additional opportunities to address the research-practice gap. Level 1 addresses Treatment Validation studies and includes an article by Lochman and colleagues concerning the programmatic adaptation, implementation, and dissemination of the empirically supported Coping Power treatment program for youth aggression. Level 2 translation, Training in Evidence-Based Practice, includes a paper by Hershenberg, Drabick, and Vivian, which focuses on the critical role that predoctoral training plays in bridging the research-practice gap. Level 3 addresses the Assessment of Clinical Utility and Feedback to Research aspects of translation. The articles by Lambert and Youn, Kraus, and Castonguay illustrate the use of commercial outcome packages that enable psychotherapists to integrate ongoing client assessment, thus enhancing the effectiveness of treatment implementation and providing data that can be fed back to researchers. Lastly, Level 4 translation, the Cross-Level Integrative Research and Communication, concerns research efforts that integrate data from clinical practice and all other levels of translation, as well as communication efforts among all stakeholders, such as researchers, psychotherapists, and clients. Using a two-chair technique as a framework for his discussion, Wolfe's article depicts the struggle inherent in research-practice integration efforts and proposes a rapprochement that highlights advancements in the field.