Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34130681›Full record

ArticleBMC public health2021

Decolonising violence against women research: a study design for co-developing violence prevention interventions with communities in low and middle income countries (LMICs).

Jenevieve Mannell, Safua Akeli Amaama, Ramona Boodoosingh, Laura Brown, Maria Calderon, Esther Cowley-Malcolm, Hattie Lowe, Angélica Motta, Geordan Shannon, Helen Tanielu and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC public health, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
2.8field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 40 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. 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

11 authors at 7 institutions in 4 countries.

Jenevieve MannellInstitute for Global Health, University College London, London, UK. j.mannell@ucl.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0002-7456-3194
Safua Akeli AmaamaTe Papa Museum, Wellington, New Zealand.
Ramona BoodoosinghNational University of Samoa, Apia, Samoa.
Laura BrownInstitute for Global Health, University College London, London, UK.
Maria CalderonHampi Consultores en Salud, Lima, Peru.
Esther Cowley-MalcolmInstitute for Global Health, University College London, London, UK.
Hattie LoweInstitute for Global Health, University College London, London, UK.
Angélica MottaDepartment of Anthropology, San Marcos University, San Marcos, Peru.
Geordan ShannonInstitute for Global Health, University College London, London, UK.
Helen TanieluNational University of Samoa, Apia, Samoa.
Carla Cortez VergaraHampi Consultores en Salud, Lima, Peru.
University College London · GBNational University of Samoa · WSEsSALUD · PEMuseum of New Zealand Te Papa Tongarewa · NZNational Institute for Health Research · GBNational University of San Marcos · PEUniversidad Peruana Cayetano Heredia · PE

Funding

Medical Research Council MR/S033629/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThere has been substantial progress in research on preventing violence against women and girls (VAWG) in the last 20 years. While the evidence suggests the potential of well-designed curriculum-based interventions that target known risk factors of violence at the community level, this has certain limitations for working in partnership with communities in low- and middle-income (LMIC) countries, particularly when it comes to addressing the power dynamics embedded within north-south research relationships.

methodsAs an alternative approach, we outline the study design for the EVE Project: a formative research project implemented in partnership with community-based researchers in Samoa and Amantaní (Peru) using a participatory co-design approach to VAWG prevention research. We detail the methods we will use to overcome the power dynamics that have been historically embedded in Western research practices, including: collaboratively defining and agreeing research guidelines before the start of the project, co-creating theories of change with community stakeholders, identifying local understandings of violence to inform the selection and measurement of potential outcomes, and co-designing VAWG prevention interventions with communities. DISCUSSION: Indigenous knowledge and ways of thinking have often been undermined historically by Western research practices, contributing to repeated calls for better recognition of Southern epistemologies. The EVE Project design outlines our collective thinking on how to address this gap and to further VAWG prevention through the meaningful participation of communities affected by violence in the research and design of their own interventions. We also discuss the significant impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the project in ways that have both disrupted and expanded the potential for a better transfer of power to the communities involved. This article offers specific strategies for integrating Southern epistemologies into VAWG research practices in four domains: ethics, theories of change, measurement, and intervention design. Our aim is to create new spaces for engagement between indigenous ways of thinking and the evidence that has been established from the past two decades of VAWG prevention research and practice.

Indexed as

COVID-19Developing CountriesFemaleHumansPandemicsPeruSamoaSARS-CoV-2ViolenceCo-designParticipatory researchPeruSamoaSouthern epistemologiesViolence against women; indigenous perspectives

Identifiers

PMID34130681
PMCPMC8205204
OpenAlexW3167908174

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.