...
  • 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>PLoS Medicine >Women’s and men’s reports of past-year prevalence of intimate partner violence and rape and women’s risk factors for intimate partner violence: A multicountry cross-sectional study in Asia and the Pacific
【24h】

Women’s and men’s reports of past-year prevalence of intimate partner violence and rape and women’s risk factors for intimate partner violence: A multicountry cross-sectional study in Asia and the Pacific

机译：男女之间过去一年亲密伴侣暴力和强奸的流行率以及女性亲密伴侣暴力的危险因素的报告：一项在亚太地区进行的跨国研究

获取原文
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Background Understanding the past-year prevalence of male-perpetrated intimate partner violence (IPV) and risk factors is essential for building evidence-based prevention and monitoring progress to Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 5.2, but so far, population-based research on this remains very limited. The objective of this study is to compare the population prevalence rates of past-year male-perpetrated IPV and nonpartner rape from women’s and men’s reports across 4 countries in Asia and the Pacific. A further objective is to describe the risk factors associated with women’s experience of past-year physical or sexual IPV from women’s reports and factors driving women’s past-year experience of partner violence. Methods and findings This paper presents findings from the United Nations Multi-country Study on Men and Violence in Asia and the Pacific. In the course of this study, in population-based cross-sectional surveys, 5,206 men and 3,106 women aged 18–49 years were interviewed from 4 countries: Cambodia, China, Papua New Guinea (PNG), and Sri Lanka. To measure risk factors, we use logistic regression and structural equation modelling to show pathways and mediators. The analysis was not based on a written plan, and following a reviewer’s comments, some material was moved to supplementary files and the regression was performed without variable elimination. Men reported more lifetime perpetration of IPV (physical or sexual IPV range 32.5%–80%) than women did experience (physical or sexual IPV range 27.5%–67.4%), but women’s reports of past-year experience (physical or sexual IPV range 8.2%–32.1%) were not very clearly different from men’s (physical or sexual IPV range 10.1%–34.0%). Women reported much more emotional/economic abuse (past-year ranges 1.4%–5.7% for men and 4.1%–27.7% for women). Reports of nonpartner rape were similar for men (range 0.8%–1.9% in the past year) and women (range 0.4%–2.3% in past year), except in Bougainville, where they were higher for men (11.7% versus 5.7%). The risk factor modelling shows 4 groups of variables to be important in experience of past-year sexual and/or physical IPV: (1) poverty, (2) all childhood trauma, (3) quarrelling and women’s limited control in relationships, and (4) partner factors (substance abuse, unemployment, and infidelity). The population attributable fraction (PAF) was largest for quarrelling often, but the second greatest PAF was for the group related to exposure to violence in childhood. The relationship control variable group had the third highest PAF, followed by other partner factors. Currently married women were also more at risk. In the structural model, a resilience pathway showed less poverty, higher education, and more gender-equitable ideas were connected and conveyed protection from IPV. These are all amenable risk factors. This research was cross-sectional, so we cannot be sure of the temporal sequence of exposure, but the outcome being a past-year measure to some extent mitigates this problem. Conclusions Past-year IPV indicators based on women’s reported experience that were developed to track SDG 5 are probably reasonably reliable but will not always give the same prevalence as may be reported by men. Report validity requires further research. Interviews with men to track past-year nonpartner rape perpetration are feasible and important. The findings suggest a range of factors are associated with past-year physical and/or sexual IPV exposure; of particular interest is the resilience pathway suggested by the structural model, which is highly amenable to intervention and explains why combining economic empowerment of women and gender empowerment/relationship skills training has been successful. This study provides additional rationale for scaling up violence prevention interventions that combine economic and gender empowerment/relationship skills building of women, as well as the value of investing in girls’ education with a view to long-term violence reduction.
机译：背景知识了解过去一年中男性犯下的亲密伴侣暴力（IPV）和危险因素的流行，对于建立基于证据的预防和监测实现可持续发展目标（SDG）5.2的进展至关重要，但是到目前为止，基于人口的研究仍然非常有限。这项研究的目的是比较亚太地区4个国家/地区的女性和男性报告中，去年发生的男性暴力IPV和非伴侣强奸的人口患病率。另一个目标是从妇女的报告中描述与妇女过去一年的身体或性IPV经历有关的风险因素，以及驱动妇女过去一年的伴侣暴力经历的因素。方法和调查结果本文介绍了《联合国亚洲及太平洋男子与暴力多国研究》的调查结果。在本研究过程中，在基于人群的横断面调查中，采访了来自四个国家（柬埔寨，中国，巴布亚新几内亚（PNG）和斯里兰卡）的5206名男性和3106名女性，年龄在18-49岁之间。为了衡量风险因素，我们使用逻辑回归和结构方程模型来显示途径和中介。该分析不是基于书面计划，并且在审阅者提出评论后，一些材料被移至补充文件中，并且在不消除变量的情况下进行了回归。男性报告的终身IPV（身体或性IPV范围为32.5％–80％）比女性经历的次数（身体或性IPV范围为27.5％–67.4％）要多，但是女性报告了过去的经历（身体或性IPV范围）。 8.2％–32.1％）与男性（身体或性IPV范围为10.1％–34.0％）没有太大差异。妇女报告说遭受了更多的情感/经济虐待（过去一年中，男性为1.4％–5.7％，女性为4.1％–27.7％）。关于非伴侣强奸的报告，男性（去年为0.8％–1.9％）和女性（去年为0.4％–2.3％）相似，但在布干维尔，男性的比例更高（11.7％对5.7％）。 ）。危险因素模型显示了4组变量，这些变量对过去一年的性和/或身体IPV经验很重要：（1）贫困，（2）所有儿童期创伤，（3）吵架和妇女对关系的控制有限，以及（ 4）合作伙伴因素（药物滥用，失业和不忠）。人口归因部分（PAF）通常是最大的争吵对象，但第二大的PAF是与儿童时期遭受暴力侵害相关的群体。关系控制变量组的PAF排名第三，其次是其他伴侣因素。目前，已婚妇女的风险也更大。在结构模型中，复原力路径显示较少的贫困，受过高等教育，并且连接了更多的性别平等观念，并传达了免受IPV的保护。这些都是可以接受的风险因素。这项研究是横断面的，因此我们不能确定暴露的时间顺序，但是作为过去一年的测量结果在一定程度上缓解了这一问题。结论基于跟踪报道的可持续发展目标5的女性报告经验的去年IPV指标可能是合理可靠的，但并不总是与男性报告的相同。报告的有效性需要进一步研究。与男子进行访谈以追踪过去一年中非伴侣的强奸行为是可行且重要的。研究结果表明，与过去一年的物理和/或性IPV暴露相关的因素很多;特别令人感兴趣的是结构模型建议的复原力途径，该途径非常适合干预，并解释了为何成功地将妇女的经济权能与性别权能/关系技能培训相结合是成功的。这项研究为扩大预防干预措施提供了更多的理由，这些干预措施结合了妇女的经济能力和性别赋权/关系技能建设，以及为减少长期暴力而对女童教育进行投资的价值。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号