Background: Intimate partner violence (IPV) represents a major public health problem in Europe, with significant physical, psychological, and social consequences. Nurses are often the first professionals capable of detecting early signs of IPV, yet lack validated instruments to assess their clinical competency in detection, evaluation, documentation, and intervention. This study aimed to develop and validate the Intimate Partner Violence Nursing Competency Scale (IPVNCS), aligned with the Nursing Intervention Classification (NIC 6403). Methods: A cross-sectional psychometric study was conducted among registered nurses in the Community of Madrid. A 30-item Likert-type self-administered instrument (1–5 scale) was developed based on NANDA, NIC 6403, and NOC frameworks. A total of 202 nurses participated. Reliability was assessed through Cronbach’s alpha. Construct validity was examined using exploratory factor analysis (EFA) with Promax rotation and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) using AMOS 26. Ethical approval was obtained (CEU San Pablo, code 843/24/104). Results: After item refinement, 26 items remained across four dimensions: (1) Intervention and Referral, (2) Detection and Assessment, (3) Documentation and Recording, and (4) Psychosocial Support. The instrument showed excellent reliability (α = 0.97). KMO was 0.947 and Bartlett’s test was significant (p < 0.001). CFA demonstrated satisfactory fit: χ2/df = 2.066, RMSEA = 0.073, CFI = 0.92, TLI = 0.91, NFI = 0.86. The final model adequately represented the latent structure. The Intimate Partner Violence Competence Scale for Nurses (IPVNCS) was developed and validated. After debugging, its psychometric properties were significantly improved. Four redundant items were eliminated, achieving internal consistency (α = 0.97), a KMO value of 0.947 and a significant Bartlett’s test of sphericity. It showed a better fit, according to χ2/df= (2.066); Parsimony= (720.736); RMR (0.0529; RMSEA (0.073); NFI (0.860); TLI (0.910) and CFI (0.920). The final model provides an adequate representation of the latent structure of the data. Conclusions: The IPVNCS is a valid and reliable tool to assess nursing competencies for clinical management of IPV. It supports structured evaluation across four core nursing domains, enabling improved educational planning, clinical decision-making, and quality of care for victims. The scale fills a gap in clinical nursing assessment tools and can support protocol development in emergency, primary care, and hospital settings.

Background: Intimate partner violence (IPV) represents a major public health problem in Europe, with significant physical, psychological, and social consequences. Nurses are often the first professionals capable of detecting early signs of IPV, yet they lack validated instruments to assess their clinical competency in detection, evaluation, documentation, and intervention. This study aimed to develop and validate the Intimate Partner Violence Nursing Competency Scale (IPVNCS), aligned with the Nursing Intervention Classification (NIC 6403). Methods: A cross-sectional psychometric study was conducted among registered nurses in the Community of Madrid. A 30-item Likert-type self-administered instrument (1–5 scale) was developed based on NANDA, NIC 6403, and NOC frameworks. A total of 202 nurses participated. Reliability was assessed through Cronbach’s alpha. Construct validity was examined using exploratory factor analysis (EFA) with Promax rotation and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) using AMOS 26. Ethical approval was obtained (CEU San Pablo, code 843/24/104). Results: After item refinement, 26 items remained across four dimensions: (1) Intervention and Referral, (2) Detection and Assessment, (3) Documentation and Recording-keeping, (4) Psychosocial Support. The instrument showed excellent reliability ($\alpha$ = 0.97). KMO was 0.947 and Bartlett’s test was significant (p < 0.001). CFA demonstrated satisfactory fit: ${\chi }^2$/df = 2.066, RMSEA = 0.073, CFI = 0.92, TLI = 0.91, NFI = 0.86. The final model adequately represented the latent structure. After debugging, its psychometric properties were significantly improved. Four redundant items were eliminated, achieving internal consistency ($\alpha$ = 0.97), a KMO value of 0.947 and a significant Bartlett’s test of sphericity. It showed a better fit, according to ${\chi }^2$/df = (2.066); Parsimony = (720.736); RMR (0.0529; RMSEA (0.073); NFI (0.860); TLI (0.910) and CFI (0.920). The final model provides an adequate representation of the latent structure of the data. This study provides initial evidence of construct validity and internal consistency reliability of the IPVNCS. Conclusions: The IPVNCS is a valid and reliable tool to assess nursing competencies for clinical management of IPV. It supports structured evaluation across four core nursing domains, enabling improved educational planning, clinical decision-making, and quality of care for victims. The scale fills a gap in clinical nursing assessment tools and can support protocol development in emergency, primary care, and hospital settings.

Background: Gender-based violence (GBV) represents a major public health issue with significant clinical, psychological, and legal implications. Healthcare professionals play a critical role in the detection, documentation, and medico-legal assessment of GBV cases, particularly in judicial contexts. Methods: A qualitative document analysis was conducted on Spanish Supreme Court judgments issued between 2023 and 2025 under Organic Law 10/2022. A thematic coding matrix was developed to identify interpretative patterns, criteria for evidentiary assessment, and the role of healthcare professionals. Data were analyzed using Atlas.ti, with triangulation against legal and healthcare literature. Results: The victim’s testimony was consistently established as the primary form of evidence when meeting criteria of persistence, coherence, and credibility. The gender-based aggravating factor was applied in a contextualized manner, requiring evidence of domination or discrimination. Sentence reviews reflected the principle of favorable retroactivity, although interpretative variability persisted. Healthcare professionals contributed as key evidentiary agents, particularly through clinical documentation and forensic reports, which reinforced testimonial credibility and supported the classification of habitual abuse. Conclusions: The findings highlight the increasing integration of healthcare-related evidence in judicial decision-making on GBV. Strengthening clinical documentation, interdisciplinary training, and medico-legal protocols is essential to improve both patient outcomes and judicial accuracy. A coordinated healthcare–legal approach is crucial to address GBV as a complex public health challenge.