Top 10 priorities for Sexual Violence and Abuse Research: indings of the James Lind Alliance Sexual Violence Priority Setting Partnership. Issue 2 (20th February 2023)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Varese, Filippo; White, Catherine; Longden, Eleanor; Charalambous, Christina; Meehan, Kate; Partington, Imogen; Ashman, Efa; Marsh, Lowri; Yule, Elizabeth; Mohamed, Laila; Chevous, Jane; Harewood, Emma; Gronlund, Toto; Jones, Anne-Marie; Malik, Samira; Maxwell, Charlotte; Perot, Concetta; Sephton, Shani; Taggart, Daniel; Tooze, Lynne; Majeed-Ariss, Rabiya
• Is Part Of: BMJ open. Volume 13:Issue 2(2023)
• Publication Date: 2023-02-20
• Subjects: MENTAL HEALTH -- PSYCHIATRY -- FORENSIC MEDICINE -- HEALTH SERVICES ADMINISTRATION & MANAGEMENT -- THERAPEUTICS -- PUBLIC HEALTH; Medicine -- Research -- Periodicals; 610.72
• DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2022-062961
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 2044-6055

Abstract

Abstract : Objectives: To establish a James Lind Alliance (JLA) Priority Setting Partnership (PSP) to identify research priorities relevant to the health and social care needs of adults with lived experience of recent and/or historical sexual violence/abuse. Participants: Adults (aged 18+ years) with lived experience of sexual violence/abuse (ie, 'survivors') were consulted for this PSP, alongside healthcare and social care professionals who support survivors across the public, voluntary, community, independent practice and social enterprise sectors. Methods: In line with standard JLA PSP methodology, participants completed an initial online survey to propose research questions relevant to the health and social care needs of survivors. Research questions unanswered by current evidence were identified, and a second online survey was deployed to identify respondents' priorities from this list. Questions prioritised through the second survey were presented at a consensus meeting with key stakeholders to agree the top 10 research priorities using a modified nominal group technique approach. Results: 223 participants (54% survivors) provided 484 suggested questions. Seventy-five unique questions unanswered by research were identified and subsequently ranked by 343 participants (60% survivors). A consensus meeting with 31 stakeholders (42% survivors) examined the top-ranking priorities from the second survey and agreed the top 10 research priorities. These included research into forms of support and recovery outcomes valued by survivors, how to best support people of colour/black, Asian and minority ethnic and lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ+) survivors, improving access to high-quality psychological therapies, reducing public misconceptions/stigma, the impact of involvement in the criminal justice system on well-being, and how physical and mental health services can become more 'trauma informed'. Conclusions: These research priorities identify crucial gaps in the existing evidence to better support adult survivors of sexual violence and abuse. Researchers and funders should prioritise further work in these priority areas identified by survivors and the professionals who support them.