Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40448312›Full record

ArticleAssessment2026

Measurement Structure and Regional Invariance of the Demographic and Health Survey Intimate Partner Violence Items: A Comparative Confirmatory Factor Analysis.

Irina Bergenfeld, Cari Jo Clark, Angela M Bengtson, Regine Haardörfer

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Assessment, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

4 authors.

Irina BergenfeldEmory University, Atlanta, GA, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-2601-2854
Cari Jo ClarkEmory University, Atlanta, GA, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-9959-5221
Angela M BengtsonEmory University, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Regine HaardörferEmory University, Atlanta, GA, USA.

Funding

Improving Global Measurement of Intimate Partner ViolenceF31HD116541 · NICHD · EMORY UNIVERSITY · PI BERGENFELD, IRINA · 2024 to 2025
$105k
NICHD NIH HHS F31 HD116541
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Intimate partner violence (IPV) is a pressing international issue affecting more than a third of women in lower- and middle-income countries (LMICs). However, accurate global assessment of IPV prevalence among women in LMICs is limited by a lack of consensus around the domains of IPV and sparse evidence on cross-country comparability. We assessed the measurement structure and regional invariance of scales used in population-based surveys to measure IPV (physical, sexual, and emotional) and controlling behaviors. Using confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), we tested unidimensional, multifactorial, hierarchical, bifactor, and bifactor S-1 models for lifetime and past-year IPV across 46 LMICs. We then assessed the invariance of the best-fitting models across countries within world regions using multiple-group CFA. Although other models also showed good fit in most countries, bifactor/bifactor S-1 models had the best fit across all countries and were invariant within most regions. Most bifactor models, especially without controlling behaviors, were primarily unidimensional; IPV can therefore be conceptualized as a single construct with nuanced facets. Researchers seeking to model IPV should consider the bifactor/bifactor S-1 model, unidimensional model, or simple summative measures incorporating physical, sexual, and emotional domains.

Indexed as

Health SurveysIntimate Partner ViolenceAdolescentAdultDeveloping CountriesFactor Analysis, StatisticalFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPsychometricsYoung Adultconfirmatory factor analysisintimate partner violenceinvariancelower- and middle-income countriesmeasurement

Identifiers

PMID40448312
PMCPMC12354333

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.