Sigrún Eyrúnardóttir Clark, M. Kimber, Lucy Downes, G. Feder, E. Fulton, Emma Howarth, Kate Johns, Ursula Lindenberg, A. d’Oliveira, A. Shaheen, C. Vindrola‐Padros, C. Powell
{"title":"Engaging domestic abuse practitioners and survivors in a review of outcome tools – reflections on differing priorities","authors":"Sigrún Eyrúnardóttir Clark, M. Kimber, Lucy Downes, G. Feder, E. Fulton, Emma Howarth, Kate Johns, Ursula Lindenberg, A. d’Oliveira, A. Shaheen, C. Vindrola‐Padros, C. Powell","doi":"10.14324/rfa.07.1.06","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n\nResearchers often develop and decide upon the measurement tools for assessing outcomes related to domestic abuse interventions. However, it is known that clients, service providers and researchers have different ideas about the outcomes that should be measured as markers of success. Evidence from non-domestic abuse sectors indicates that engagement of service providers, clients and researchers contributes to more robust research, policy and practice. We reflect on what we have learnt from the engagement of practitioners and domestic abuse survivors in a review of domestic abuse measurement tools where there were clear differences in priorities between survivors, practitioners and researchers about the ideal measurement tools. The purpose of this reflective article is to support the improvement of future outcome measurement from domestic abuse interventions, while ensuring that domestic abuse survivors do not relive trauma because of measurement.","PeriodicalId":165758,"journal":{"name":"Research for All","volume":"75 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Research for All","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14324/rfa.07.1.06","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Researchers often develop and decide upon the measurement tools for assessing outcomes related to domestic abuse interventions. However, it is known that clients, service providers and researchers have different ideas about the outcomes that should be measured as markers of success. Evidence from non-domestic abuse sectors indicates that engagement of service providers, clients and researchers contributes to more robust research, policy and practice. We reflect on what we have learnt from the engagement of practitioners and domestic abuse survivors in a review of domestic abuse measurement tools where there were clear differences in priorities between survivors, practitioners and researchers about the ideal measurement tools. The purpose of this reflective article is to support the improvement of future outcome measurement from domestic abuse interventions, while ensuring that domestic abuse survivors do not relive trauma because of measurement.