Table 1. Outcomes of Online Interventions for Women Exposed to IPVA.

Authors	Intervention	Outcomes
(Glass et al., 2010)	Computerized safety decision aid (USA)	Evaluation study: The intervention decreased decisional conflict and increased feelings of support in the safety planning process.
(Constantino et al., 2015)	HELPP (USA)	RCT: HELPP decreased anxiety, depression, and anger. It increased personal and social support. HELPP online proved to be more effective than HELPP face-to-face.
(Eden et al., 2015)	IRIS (USA)	RCT: IRIS decreased uncertainty, feeling unsupported, and decisional conflict with regard to personal safety, more so than for the control group.
(Koziol-McLain et al., 2018)	iSAFE (NZL)	RCT: iSAFE reduced violence and symptoms of depression for Maori-women. Non-Maori women did not experience this. Both the intervention and control group found iSAFE useful.
(Hegarty et al., 2019)	I-DECIDE (AUS)	RCT: No difference was found between the intervention and control group. Women in both groups reported increased self-efficacy and decreases in depression and fear of partner. Process evaluation: Both groups experienced increased awareness, self-efficacy, and perceived support.
(Ford-Gilboe et al., 2020)	iCan Plan 4 Safety (CAN)	RCT: Women in the intervention and control group experienced decreases in depression, PTSD, coercive control, and decisional conflict. They experienced increases in helpfulness of safety actions, confidence in safety planning, social support, and mastery (control over own life). Process evaluation: All participants reported high levels of benefit, safety, accessibility of the interventions, and low risk of harm. Women were more positive about helpfulness and fit when they received a tailored intervention.

Note. RCT = randomized controlled trial, PTSD = post-traumatic stress disorder.