Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38935801›Full record

ArticlePloS one2024

Prevalence and risk factors of intimate partner violence during the COVID-19 pandemic: Results from the population-based study DREAMCORONA.

Amera Mojahed, Judith T Mack, Andreas Staudt, Victoria Weise, Lakshmi Shiva, Prabha Chandra, Susan Garthus-Niegel

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

7 authors.

Amera MojahedFaculty of Medicine Carl Gustav Carus, Department of Psychotherapy and Psychosomatic Medicine, Technical University of Dresden, Dresden, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-4867-9617
Judith T MackFaculty of Medicine Carl Gustav Carus, Department of Psychotherapy and Psychosomatic Medicine, Technical University of Dresden, Dresden, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-1938-3414
Andreas StaudtFaculty of Medicine Carl Gustav Carus, Department of Psychotherapy and Psychosomatic Medicine, Technical University of Dresden, Dresden, Germany.
Victoria WeiseFaculty of Medicine Carl Gustav Carus, Department of Psychotherapy and Psychosomatic Medicine, Technical University of Dresden, Dresden, Germany.
Lakshmi ShivaAasare Neuropsychiatric Centre, Bangalore, India.
Prabha ChandraNational Institute of Mental Health and Neurosciences, Bangalore, India.
Susan Garthus-NiegelFaculty of Medicine Carl Gustav Carus, Department of Psychotherapy and Psychosomatic Medicine, Technical University of Dresden, Dresden, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-7472-674X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesThis study examines the 12-month prevalence rates of intimate partner violence (IPV) victimization, including psychological, physical, and sexual forms, in women and men. It also aims to identify changes in IPV victimization during the COVID-19 pandemic and to explore factors associated with the occurrence of any IPV victimization during this period.

methodsData from the DREAMCORONA study in Germany collected from May 2020 to February 2021 included 737 participants, i.e., (expectant) mothers (64%) and fathers (36%). The Revised Conflict Tactics Scale (CTS2S) short form was used to assess the 12-month IPV victimization. Prevalence of IPV victimization as well as changes in IPV victimization during the pandemic were analyzed descriptively, with results stratified by sex. Multiple logistic regression was employed to identify risk factors for IPV.

resultsPsychological IPV was found to be the most prevalent form of violence, with the occurrence of any psychological IPV affecting 48.5% of women and 39.4% of men, while 2.6% of women and 3.3% of men reported the occurrence of any physical IPV victimization, and 2.8% of women and 1.5% of men reported the occurrence of any sexual IPV victimization. Of those who experienced the occurrence of any IPV in the last 12 months, 89.7% of women and 89.8% of men were victimized by one single act of violence. The majority of affected participants reported no change in psychological and physical IPV victimization during the pandemic. Nevertheless, for certain IPV behaviors on the psychological and physical IPV victimization subscales, both affected women and men also reported higher frequencies during the COVID-19 pandemic. Multiple logistic regression revealed that higher levels of relationship satisfaction were negatively associated with the occurrence of any IPV victimization for women and men, whereas greater levels of own anger-hostility symptoms were positively associated with the occurrence of any IPV victimization.

conclusionsPsychological IPV was present in almost every second (expectant) couple. The majority of affected women and men reported no change in their psychological and physical IPV victimization, suggesting that they continued to experience IPV during the pandemic. This underlines the importance of promoting healthier relationship dynamics, coping strategies, and emotional well-being to reduce the risk of IPV, even in times of crisis. Our study sheds light on the early stages of the pandemic and highlights the ongoing need for research into the temporal dynamics of IPV.

Indexed as

COVID-19Crime VictimsIntimate Partner ViolenceAdolescentAdultFemaleGermanyHumansMaleMiddle AgedPandemicsPrevalenceRisk FactorsSARS-CoV-2Young Adult

Identifiers

PMID38935801
PMCPMC11210879

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.