Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33958379›Full record

SynthesisBMJ global health2021

Natural hazards, disasters and violence against women and girls: a global mixed-methods systematic review.

Alyssa Mari Thurston, Heidi Stöckl, Meghna Ranganathan

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMJ global health, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 59 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
59citing papers in PubMed, 6 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

59 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. A Review of Climate Security Discussions in Japan.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Is It Rape or Consent? College Men Just Don't Know.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2025
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Sex and Gender Influences on the Impacts of Disasters: A Rapid Review of Evidence.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2025
    Review
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

3 authors.

Alyssa Mari ThurstonDepartment of Disease Control, Faculty of Infectious and Tropical Diseases, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK alyssa.thurston@lshtm.ac.uk aly.thurston@gmail.com.ORCID 0000-0002-5860-1664
Heidi StöcklDepartment of Global Health and Development, Faculty of Public Health and Policy, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-0907-8483
Meghna RanganathanDepartment of Global Health and Development, Faculty of Public Health and Policy, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-5827-343X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionDisasters triggered by climate and other natural hazards are increasing in frequency, severity and duration worldwide. Disasters disproportionately impact women and girls, with some evidence suggesting that violence against women and girls (VAWG) increases in disaster settings. Suggested risk factors for postdisaster VAWG include increased life stressors, failure of law enforcement, exposure to high-risk environments, exacerbation of existing gender inequalities and unequal social norms. We aim to systematically appraise the global literature on the association between disasters from natural hazards and VAWG.

methodsWe conducted a systematic review using the following databases: Embase, Global Health, Medline, PubMed and Social Policy and Practice and searched grey literature. We included quantitative, qualitative or mixed-methods studies published in English language that examined the association between disasters from natural hazards and VAWG. We summarised the findings using a narrative synthesis approach.

resultsOf 555 non-duplicate records, we included a total of 37 quantitative, qualitative and mixed-methods studies. Among the quantitative studies, eight studies found a positive association between disaster exposure and increased VAWG, and four additional studies found positive associations with some violence types but not others. Qualitative findings offered insights into three hypothesised pathways: disaster exposure associated with (1) an increase of stressors that trigger VAWG; (2) an increase of enabling environments for VAWG and (3) an exacerbation of underlying drivers of VAWG.

conclusionAs the first known global systematic review on the relationship between disasters from natural hazards and VAWG, this review contributes to the evidence base. We were limited by the quality of quantitative studies, specifically study designs, the measurement of variables and geographic scope. The severe health consequences of VAWG and increasing frequency of extreme events means that rigorously designed and better quality studies are needed to inform evidence-based policies and safeguard women and girls during and after disasters.

Indexed as

DisastersViolenceFemaleHumansQualitative Researchdiseasedisorderenvironmental healthor injuryother infectionsystematic review

Identifiers

PMID33958379
PMCPMC8112410

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.