Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Meta-Analysis
. 2020 Jun;10(1):010409.
doi: 10.7189/jogh.10.010409.

Psychosocial interventions for intimate partner violence in low and middle income countries: A meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

Psychosocial interventions for intimate partner violence in low and middle income countries: A meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

David T Turner et al. J Glob Health. 2020 Jun.

Abstract

Background: Intimate partner violence (IPV) is prevalent worldwide and presents pernicious consequences for women in developing countries or humanitarian settings. We examined the efficacy of psychosocial interventions for IPV among women in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs).

Methods: Seven databases were systematically searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) examining psychosocial interventions for IPV in LMICs. Thirteen RCTs were included in random-effects meta-analyses. Risk ratios (RR) and risk difference were calculated as pooled effect sizes. Risk of bias was assessed using an adapted version of the Cochrane tool accounting for cluster RCTs. Sensitivity analyses were conducted for risk of bias and design characteristics. Publication bias and heterogeneity were assessed.

Results: Psychosocial interventions reduced any form of IPV by 27% at shortest (relative risk (RR) = 0.73) and 25% at longest (RR = 0.75) follow up. Physical IPV was reduced by 22% at shortest (RR = 0.78) and 27% at longest (RR = 0.73) follow up. Sexual IPV was reduced by 23% at longest follow up (RR = 0.77) but showed no significant effect at shortest follow-up. Sensitivity analyses for risk of bias led to an increase in magnitude of the effect for any form of IPV and physical IPV. The effect on sexual IPV was no longer significant. Heterogeneity was moderate to high in the majority of comparisons.

Conclusions: Psychosocial interventions may reduce the impact of IPV in humanitarian or low and middle income settings. We acknowledge heterogeneity and limited availability of RCTs demonstrating minimal risk of bias as limitations.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: The authors completed the ICMJE Unified Competing Interest form (available upon request from the corresponding author), and declare no conflicts of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
PRISMA flow diagram of the study selection process.

References

    1. Devries KM, Mak JYT, Garcia-Moreno C, Petzold M, Child JC, Falder G, et al. The global prevalence of intimate partner violence against women. Science. 2013;340:1527-8. 10.1126/science.1240937 - DOI - PubMed
    1. World Health Organization. Global and regional estimates of violence against women: Prevalence and health effects of intimate partner violence and non-partner sexual violence. Geneva: World Health Organisation: 2013.
    1. Lundgren R, Amin A.Addressing intimate partner violence and sexual violence among adolescents: Emerging evidence of effectiveness. J Adolesc Health. 2015;56:S42-50. 10.1016/j.jadohealth.2014.08.012 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Campbell JC, Baty ML, Ghandour RM, Stockman JK, Francisco L, Wagman J.The intersection of intimate partner violence against women and HIV/AIDS: a review. Int J Inj Contr Saf Promot. 2008;15:221-31. 10.1080/17457300802423224 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Warshaw C, Brashler P, Gil J. Mental health consequences of intimate partner violence. Intimate partner violence: A health-based perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2009.

Publication types