Measuring Healing and Recovery After Gender-Based Violence: A Scoping Review

Healing after gender-based violence (GBV) is multidimensional, with varying instruments used in the scientific literature to capture this phenomenon quantitively in survivor populations. The purpose of this scoping review was to (a) describe quantitative measures used to evaluate recovery after GBV, (b) compare these findings with domains uncovered in a qualitative metasynthesis about survivors' perspectives about healing after GBV, and (c) summarize recovery relationships found. We searched Pubmed, PsycInfo, and Violence/Criminology/Family Studies Abstracts. Studies were included for review if they (a) used quantitative methods, (b) evaluated healing or recovery in survivors of GBV, (c) were available in English, and (d) were empirical articles in peer-reviewed journals. Two thousand nine hundred thirty-five articles were reviewed by title and abstract, and 92 articles were reviewed by full text. Twenty-six articles were included in this review. Eight studies used an alleviation of adverse symptomology as a proxy for recovery, eight used growth-related outcomes, and ten used a combination of both types of measures. While the quantitative instruments synthesized in this review seemed to map onto some of the recovery domains identified through qualitative metasynthesis, no study synthesized measured all domains simultaneously. Studies synthesized identified that recovery-related outcomes may be influenced by social support, symptom burden, disclosure, and various therapeutic intervention programs tested in the literature to date. Synthesizing research on recovery after GBV is an essential step to understand gaps in measurement and understanding. Streamlining and using holistic recovery outcome measurement can aid in the development of evidence-based interventions to promote healing in survivor populations.

Using Mixed Methods Integration to Evaluate the Structure of Help-Seeking Barriers Scale: A Survivor-Centered Approach

Despite the high prevalence of adverse health and trauma-related outcomes associated with intimate partner violence (IPV), help-seeking and service utilization among survivors is low. This study is part of a larger mixed-methods and survivor-centered validation study on the Icelandic Barriers to Help-Seeking for Trauma (BHS-TR) scale, a new barriers measure focused on trauma recovery. A mixed-methods legitimation strategy of integration was employed to evaluate the BHS-TR structure in samples of IPV survivors. The merging of qualitative (n = 17) and quantitative (n = 137) data through a joint display analysis revealed mainly complementarity findings, strengthening the scale’s overall trustworthiness and validity evidence. Divergent findings involved items about mistrust, perceived rejection, stigmatization, fearing vulnerability, and safeguarding efforts that were significant help-seeking barriers in the survivors’ narratives, whereas factor analysis indicated their removal. These BHS-TR items were critically evaluated in an iterative spiraling process that supported the barriers’ influence, illuminated core issues, and guided potential refinements. This work contributes to the growing field of mixed methods instrument validation placing equal status on qualitative and quantitative methods and emphasizing integration to provide more complete insights. Moreover, the study’s findings highlight the added value of further exploring divergence between two sets of data and the importance of giving attention to the voices of the target population throughout the validation process.

Understanding and Measuring Help-Seeking Barriers among Intimate Partner Violence Survivors: Mixed-Methods Validation Study of the Icelandic Barriers to Help-Seeking for Trauma (BHS-TR) Scale

Intimate partner violence (IPV) against women is a global human rights violation of vast proportions and a severe public health problem. Despite high rates of adverse outcomes related to IPV, help-seeking and service utilization among survivors is low. This exploratory sequential mixed-methods study using a combined etic-emic approach describes the validation of the Icelandic Barriers to Help-Seeking for Trauma (BHS-TR) scale. The qualitative phase involved developing new items based on the experiences of 17 Icelandic IPV survivors, identifying barriers including beliefs that help-seeking is a sign of weakness, and the desire to safeguard oneself from re-traumatization. The quantitative phase examined the psychometrics of the BHS-TR in a sample of 137 IPV survivors in Iceland. Results supported an eight-factor structure (Financial Concerns; Unavailable/Not Helpful; External Constraints; Inconvenience; Weakness/Vulnerability; Problem Management Beliefs; Frozen/Confused; and Shame), which when grouped comprised two indices of Structural and Internal Barriers. The scale's internal consistency was high (α  =  0.87), and the results provided evidence of convergent, discriminant, and known-group validity. This study adds to the growing literature supporting the advantages of applying mixed methods for instrument development and validation, and its results highlight the significance of giving rise to the voices of survivors. The BHS-TR is the first trauma-specific and survivor-centered measure of help-seeking barriers available in Iceland. It can be used to provide valuable information that may guide the development of evidence-based interventions to break down barriers and help survivors find ways to trauma recovery.

Adaptation of the barriers to help-seeking for trauma (BHS-TR) scale: a cross-cultural cognitive interview study with female intimate partner violence survivors in Iceland

Background

Even though traumatization is linked to substantially reduced health-related quality of life, help-seeking and service utilization among trauma survivors are very low. To date, there has not been available in Iceland a culturally attuned, self-reported measure on help-seeking barriers after trauma. This study aimed to translate and cross-culturally adapt the English version of Barriers to Help-Seeking for Trauma (BHS-TR) scale into the Icelandic language and context.

Methods

The BHS-TR was culturally adapted following well-established and rigorous guidelines, including forward-backward translation, expert committee review, and pretesting through cognitive interviews. Two rounds of interviews with 17 female survivors of intimate partner violence were conducted using a think-aloud technique and verbal probing. Data were analyzed using qualitative content analysis, a combination of deductive and inductive approaches.

Results

Issues with the BHS-TR that were uncovered in the study were classified into four categories related to general design, translation, cultural aspects, and post-trauma context. The trauma-specific issues emerged as a new category identified in this study and included concepts specific to trauma experiences. Therefore, modifications were of great importance—resulting in the scale becoming more trauma-informed. Revisions made to address identified issues improved the scale, and the process led to an Icelandic version, which appears to be semantically and conceptually equivalent to the original version; additionally, the results provided evidence of content validity.

Conclusions

As a cognitive interview study, it adds to the growing cognitive interviewing methodology literature. Furthermore, the results provide essential insights into the self-report response process of trauma survivors, highlighting the significance of making health-related research instruments trauma-informed.