Citation

Glass N, Perrin N, Hanson GC, Bloom T, Gardner E, Campbell JC. Am. J. Public Health 2008; 98(6): 1021-1027.

Affiliation

Johns Hopkins University School of Nursing.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2008, American Public Health Association)

DOI

10.2105/AJPH.2007.117770

PMID

18445801

PMCID

PMC2377312

Abstract

Objectives. We revised the Danger Assessment to predict reassault in abusive female same-sex relationships and then evaluated the revised instrument (DA-R) with survivors. Methods. We used focus groups and interviews to evaluate the assessment tool and identify new risk factors and telephone interviews at baseline and at 1-month follow-up to evaluate the revised assessment. Results. The new assessment tool comprised 8 original and 10 new items. Predictors included increase in physical violence (relative risk ratio [RRR]=1.95; 95% confidence interval [CI]=0.84, 4.54), constant jealousy or possessiveness of abuser (RRR=4.07; 95% CI=0.61, 27.00), cohabitation (RRR=1.96; 95% CI=0.54, 7.12), threats or use of gun by abuser (RRR=1.93; 95% CI=0.79, 4.75), alcoholism or problem drinking of abuser (RRR=1.47; 95% CI= 0.79, 2.71), illegal drug use or abuse of prescription medications by abuser (RRR= 1.33; 95% CI= 0.72, 2.46), stalking by abuser (RRR=1.39; 95% CI= 0.70,2.76), failure ofindividuals to take victim seriously when she sought help (RRR=1.66; 95% CI= 0.90, 3.05), victim's fear of reinforcingnegative stereotypes (RRR= 1.42; 95% CI= 0.73,2.77), and secrecy of abuse (RRR=1.72; 95% CI= 0.74, 3.99).Both unweighted (P<.005)and weighted (P<.004) versions of the revised assessment weresignificant predictors ofreassault. Conclusions. The revised Danger Assessment accuratelyassesses risk ofreassault in abusive female relationships.

Language: en