Intimate partner violence in 46 low-income and middle-income countries: an appraisal of the most vulnerable groups of women using national health surveys

Abstract

IntroductionIntimate partner violence (IPV) against women is a critical public health issue that transcends social and economic boundaries and considered to be a major obstacle to the progress towards the 2030 women, children and adolescents’ health goals in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs). Standardised IPV measures have been increasingly incorporated into Demographic and Health Surveys carried out in LMICs. Routine reporting and disaggregated analyses at country level are essential to identify populational subgroups that are particularly vulnerable to IPV exposure.MethodsWe examined data from 46 countries with surveys carried out between 2010 and 2017 to assess the prevalence and inequalities in recent psychological, physical and sexual IPV among ever-partnered women aged 15–49 years. Inequalities were assessed by disaggregating the data according to household wealth, women’s age, women’s empowerment level, polygyny status of the relationship and area of residence.ResultsNational levels of reported IPV varied widely across countries—from less than 5% in Armenia and Comoros to more than 40% in Afghanistan. Huge inequalities within countries were also observed. Generally, richer and more empowered women reported less IPV, as well as those whose partners had no cowives. Different patterns across countries were observed according to women’s age and area of residence but in most cases younger women and those living in rural areas tend to be more exposed to IPV.ConclusionThe present study advances the current knowledge by providing a global panorama of the prevalence of different forms of IPV across LMICs, helping the identification of the most vulnerable groups of women and for future monitoring of leaving no one behind towards achieving the elimination of all forms of violence among women and girls.

R.E.S.P.e.c.T and intimate partner violence: a cross-sectional study using DHS data in Kenya

“…More research is needed to clearly de ne the relationship between asset ownership and IPV, and the contextual or cultural factors that account for the difference in ndings across countries as it is important to understand how to advance women's asset ownership and economic status without increasing risk of IPV. For every increase in wealth quintile women had less than half the odds of experiencing lifetime IPV or IPV in the last 12 months, similar to ndings in prior studies in the 2014 KDHS(32) and in 46 LMICs(23).This study adds to the growing body of work on barriers to care in relation to IPV. Women who had no perceived barriers had half the odds of experiencing lifetime IPV or IPV in the last 12 months.…”

“…In Nicaragua and Tanzania, asset ownership was negatively associated with IPV and follow-up qualitative studies suggest that women in these countries felt increased autonomy and elevated respect from their husbands because of asset ownership (22). A multi-country study in 46 low-and-middle-income countries (LMICs) using wealth quintiles found that poorer women were more vulnerable to IPV (23). Studies on the relationship between poverty and IPV have similar ndings (16,24).…”

Evidence of sociocultural factors influencing intimate partner violence among young women in sub-Saharan Africa: a scoping review

“…For example, a recent study conducted in low-income and middle-income countries including SSA found that female adolescents and younger adults of 15–19 years were at higher risk of IPV when compared with older groups of women. 4 This pattern was mostly observed in Namibia, Senegal, Zimbabwe, Cameroon, Sierra Leone, Congo, Zambia and Rwanda. However, different patterns regarding the higher risk of IPV in older rather than younger women were found particularly in countries outside SSA such as in Europe and Central Asia.…”

“…However, different patterns regarding the higher risk of IPV in older rather than younger women were found particularly in countries outside SSA such as in Europe and Central Asia. 4 …”

“… 3 8 9 The harmful social norms and the acceptance of the dominant role of men in society also perpetuate gender inequality to the detriment of women. 4 10 Young women in SSA are further affected by high-risk behaviours including risky sexual behaviour and violence, including IPV and their dating older partners increases their vulnerability to IPV. 11 12 Authors focusing on gender-based violence research argue that young women who are dating older men are unable to take control of their relationships.…”