ArticleBMJ open2020
Ensuring the comparability of cross-national survey data on intimate partner violence against women: a cross-sectional, population-based study in the European Union.
Article in BMJ open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 34 citations in OpenAlex.
- Is the elimination of violence against women a realistic goal for the near future?Nature communications · 2026Review
- Complex Expressions of Power. Aspects of Gender in/Equality in Violent Intimate Relationships in Sweden.Violence against women · 2026Article
- Measurement structure, invariance, and item functioning of intimate partner violence scales in high-income countries: Results from 30 population-based surveys.Psychology of violence · 2025Article
- Do Boys Empathize Less than Girls? Exploring the Links Among Empathy, Gender and Sexist Attitudes in Adolescents.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Treatment Resistant Perpetrators of Intimate Partner Violence: Research Advances.Psychosocial intervention · 2023Article
- Stories of Backlash in Interviews With Survivors of Intimate Partner Violence Against Women in Sweden.Violence against women · 2023Article
- Measuring Perceived Severity of Intimate Partner Violence against Women (IPVAW) among the General Population and IPVAW Offenders.Psychosocial intervention · 2022Article
- Monitoring sustainable development goal 5.2: Cross-country cross-time invariance of measures for intimate partner violence.PloS one · 2022Article
- Undoing the 'Nordic Paradox': Factors affecting rates of disclosed violence against women across the EU.PloS one · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo ensure the cross-national comparability of the set of questions addressing physical and sexual intimate partner violence against women (IPVAW) included in the European Union (EU) Agency for Fundamental Rights (FRA) survey. Once the measurement invariance of these measures is established, we aim to make appropriate and valid comparisons of the levels of physical and sexual IPVAW across the EU countries.
designCross-sectional, population-based study.
participantsData were drawn from the survey conducted by the FRA on violence against women, including the responses of 42 002 adult women from the 28 countries of the EU.
main outcome measuresThe set of questions addressing lifetime prevalence of physical and sexual IPVAW used in the FRA survey. The psychometric properties (ie, reliability and validity) of these measures were examined, as well as their latent structure and their measurement invariance across the 28 EU countries.
resultsThe physical and sexual IPVAW measures presented adequate internal consistency and validity evidence based on their relations to other variables in all countries. A latent two-factor structure was supported and scalar invariance was established across countries. Our results showed that the average levels of physical and sexual IPVAW were highest in Denmark, Finland, Sweden and UK compared with the rest of the EU countries. In many of the other countries the levels of these types of violence overlapped, especially in the case of sexual IPVAW.
conclusionsThe findings of this study showed that the set of questions addressing physical and sexual IPVAW included in the FRA survey can be compared across all EU countries, highlighting the importance of testing the measurement equivalence of the instruments used in large sociodemographic surveys in order to make valid cross-national comparisons.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.