Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32781565›Full record

SynthesisInternational journal of environmental research and public health2020

A Mixed-Methods Systematic Review: Infidelity, Romantic Jealousy and Intimate Partner Violence against Women.

Marjorie Pichon, Sarah Treves-Kagan, Erin Stern, Nambusi Kyegombe, Heidi Stöckl, Ana Maria Buller

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

26 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Romantic Jealousy, Cortisol, and Dark Chocolate.Archives of sexual behavior · 2025
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Marjorie PichonDepartment of Global Health and Development, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London WC1H 9SH, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-3803-5896
Sarah Treves-KaganDepartment of Health Behavior, Gillings School of Global Health, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-0369-6288
Erin SternDepartment of Global Health and Development, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London WC1H 9SH, UK.
Nambusi KyegombeDepartment of Global Health and Development, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London WC1H 9SH, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-3986-0361
Heidi StöcklDepartment of Global Health and Development, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London WC1H 9SH, UK.
Ana Maria BullerDepartment of Global Health and Development, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London WC1H 9SH, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-3007-9747

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Infidelity and romantic jealousy (RJ) are commonly cited relational level drivers of intimate partner violence (IPV) but remain undertheorized and underutilized in IPV research and prevention. This global systematic review aims to characterize the existing research on real or suspected infidelity and RJ in relation to IPV and inform future research and programming. We systematically searched 11 databases for peer-reviewed research, published between April 2009 and 2019, that provided data on the prevalence or a measure of association (quantitative), or pathway (qualitative), between real or suspected infidelity or RJ, and IPV. Fifty-one papers from 28 countries were included and the evidence showed a consistent association between real or suspected infidelity, RJ and IPV. Our findings identify three overarching mechanisms and six pathways between infidelity, RJ and IPV. These provide support for prominent theories in the field related to patriarchal culture, threatened masculinities and femininities and a lack of emotional regulation and conflict resolution skills, but not evolutionary theories. Our findings suggest that researchers should use standardized measurement tools that make the distinction between RJ and suspected, confirmed and accusations of infidelity. Policy and programming should aim to transform traditional gender roles, accounting for infidelity and RJ and improving couple's communication and trust.

Indexed as

Intimate Partner ViolenceJealousyMarriageTrustFemaleHumansMaleSpouse Abusecontrolling behaviourdomestic violencefamily violencegenderinfidelityintimate partner violenceromantic jealousyspouse abusesystematic reviewunfaithfulness

Identifiers

PMID32781565
PMCPMC7459695

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.