Risk for Severe Intimate Partner Violence in Nairobi's Informal Settlements: Tailoring the Danger Assessment to Kenya.

IF 2.5 3区 医学 Q2 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Shannon N Wood, Nancy Perrin, Irene Akumu, Ben Asira, Amber Clough, Nancy Glass, Jacquelyn Campbell, Michele R Decker
{"title":"Risk for Severe Intimate Partner Violence in Nairobi's Informal Settlements: Tailoring the Danger Assessment to Kenya.","authors":"Shannon N Wood, Nancy Perrin, Irene Akumu, Ben Asira, Amber Clough, Nancy Glass, Jacquelyn Campbell, Michele R Decker","doi":"10.9745/GHSP-D-23-00116","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Understanding the risk for severe intimate partner violence (IPV) can help women and providers assess danger. The validated, widely used Danger Assessment (DA) developed for this purpose has not been tested in a low- and middle-income country (LMIC). We tailored the DA to Nairobi, Kenya, and prospectively evaluated baseline danger against severe IPV at 3-month follow-up.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We used data from the myPlan Kenya trial conducted in 3 informal settlements in Nairobi, Kenya, from 2017 to 2018. DA items were refined through formative and pilot phases, yielding minor wording modifications. Quantitative analyses prospectively evaluated baseline DA against severe IPV at 3-month follow-up to understand the predictive effect of the (1) original 20-item DA, (2) 16-item Kenya-DA (highest relative risk ratios [RRR] with severe IPV), and (3) 16-item Kenya-DA weighted (weighting based on strength of RRRs). Diagnostic criteria, including C-statistics, sensitivity, specificity, receiver operating characteristic curve, and area under the curve, were examined; logistic regressions quantified the odds of each metric predicting severe IPV at follow-up.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The original 20-item DA produced the highest specificity (75.41%) and lowest sensitivity (57.14%), resulting in the overall lowest C-statistic. Compared to the 16-item Kenya-DA, the Kenya-DA weighted produced slightly higher sensitivity (66.67% vs. 64.29%) and specificity (77.05% vs. 72.13%), resulting in the highest C-statistic (0.78 vs. 0.75). All versions successfully predicted severe IPV at 3-month follow-up (original DA: odds ratio [OR]=1.26, 95% confidence interval [CI]=1.12, 1.41, <i>P</i><.001; Kenya-DA: OR=1.33, 95% CI=1.16, 1.53, <i>P</i><.001; Kenya-DA weighted: OR=1.19, 95% CI=1.10, 1.28, <i>P</i><.001). Several factors identified as homicide risk factors in other settings were not prospectively associated with severe IPV.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Within a high-danger LMIC context, all 3 DA configurations performed well diagnostically. We recommend the 16-item Kenya-DA given the value for simplicity and field implementation, whereas the Kenya-DA weighted can add accuracy for research purposes.</p>","PeriodicalId":12692,"journal":{"name":"Global Health: Science and Practice","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10906551/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Global Health: Science and Practice","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.9745/GHSP-D-23-00116","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Understanding the risk for severe intimate partner violence (IPV) can help women and providers assess danger. The validated, widely used Danger Assessment (DA) developed for this purpose has not been tested in a low- and middle-income country (LMIC). We tailored the DA to Nairobi, Kenya, and prospectively evaluated baseline danger against severe IPV at 3-month follow-up.

Methods: We used data from the myPlan Kenya trial conducted in 3 informal settlements in Nairobi, Kenya, from 2017 to 2018. DA items were refined through formative and pilot phases, yielding minor wording modifications. Quantitative analyses prospectively evaluated baseline DA against severe IPV at 3-month follow-up to understand the predictive effect of the (1) original 20-item DA, (2) 16-item Kenya-DA (highest relative risk ratios [RRR] with severe IPV), and (3) 16-item Kenya-DA weighted (weighting based on strength of RRRs). Diagnostic criteria, including C-statistics, sensitivity, specificity, receiver operating characteristic curve, and area under the curve, were examined; logistic regressions quantified the odds of each metric predicting severe IPV at follow-up.

Results: The original 20-item DA produced the highest specificity (75.41%) and lowest sensitivity (57.14%), resulting in the overall lowest C-statistic. Compared to the 16-item Kenya-DA, the Kenya-DA weighted produced slightly higher sensitivity (66.67% vs. 64.29%) and specificity (77.05% vs. 72.13%), resulting in the highest C-statistic (0.78 vs. 0.75). All versions successfully predicted severe IPV at 3-month follow-up (original DA: odds ratio [OR]=1.26, 95% confidence interval [CI]=1.12, 1.41, P<.001; Kenya-DA: OR=1.33, 95% CI=1.16, 1.53, P<.001; Kenya-DA weighted: OR=1.19, 95% CI=1.10, 1.28, P<.001). Several factors identified as homicide risk factors in other settings were not prospectively associated with severe IPV.

Conclusion: Within a high-danger LMIC context, all 3 DA configurations performed well diagnostically. We recommend the 16-item Kenya-DA given the value for simplicity and field implementation, whereas the Kenya-DA weighted can add accuracy for research purposes.

内罗毕非正规住区的严重亲密伴侣暴力风险:针对肯尼亚的危险评估。
导言:了解严重亲密伴侣暴力(IPV)的风险可以帮助妇女和医疗服务提供者评估危险。为此开发的经过验证、广泛使用的危险评估(DA)尚未在中低收入国家(LMIC)进行过测试。我们为肯尼亚内罗毕量身定制了 DA,并在 3 个月的随访中对严重 IPV 的基线危险性进行了前瞻性评估:我们使用了 2017 年至 2018 年在肯尼亚内罗毕 3 个非正式定居点开展的 myPlan Kenya 试验的数据。通过形成阶段和试点阶段对DA项目进行了改进,对措辞进行了小幅修改。定量分析前瞻性地评估了基线 DA 与 3 个月随访时的严重 IPV,以了解(1)原始 20 项 DA、(2)16 项 Kenya-DA(与严重 IPV 的最高相对风险比 [RRR])和(3)16 项 Kenya-DA 加权(基于 RRR 的强度加权)的预测效果。对诊断标准(包括 C 统计量、灵敏度、特异性、接收者操作特征曲线和曲线下面积)进行了检查;逻辑回归量化了每个指标预测随访时严重 IPV 的几率:最初的 20 个项目 DA 产生了最高的特异性(75.41%)和最低的灵敏度(57.14%),导致总体 C 统计量最低。与 16 个项目的肯尼亚-DA 相比,肯尼亚-DA 加权版的灵敏度(66.67% 对 64.29%)和特异度(77.05% 对 72.13%)略高,C 统计量最高(0.78 对 0.75)。所有版本都能成功预测 3 个月随访时的严重 IPV(原始 DA:几率比[OR]=1.26,95% 置信区间[CI]=1.12, 1.41,PPPConclusion):结论:在高危险的 LMIC 环境中,所有 3 个 DA 配置都具有良好的诊断效果。我们推荐使用 16 项肯尼亚-DA,因为它具有简便性和实地实施的价值,而肯尼亚-DA 加权版则可以提高研究目的的准确性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Global Health: Science and Practice
Global Health: Science and Practice Medicine-Health Policy
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
7.50%
发文量
178
审稿时长
22 weeks
期刊介绍: Global Health: Science and Practice (GHSP) is a no-fee, open-access, peer-reviewed, online journal aimed to improve health practice, especially in low- and middle-income countries. Our goal is to reach those who design, implement, manage, evaluate, and otherwise support health programs. We are especially interested in advancing knowledge on practical program implementation issues, with information on what programs entail and how they are implemented. GHSP is currently indexed in PubMed, PubMed Central, POPLINE, EBSCO, SCOPUS,. the Web of Science Emerging Sources Citation Index, and the USAID Development Experience Clearinghouse (DEC). TOPICS: Issued four times a year, GHSP will include articles on all global health topics, covering diverse programming models and a wide range of cross-cutting issues that impact and support health systems. Examples include but are not limited to: Health: Addiction and harm reduction, Child Health, Communicable and Emerging Diseases, Disaster Preparedness and Response, Environmental Health, Family Planning/Reproductive Health, HIV/AIDS, Malaria, Maternal Health, Neglected Tropical Diseases, Non-Communicable Diseases/Injuries, Nutrition, Tuberculosis, Water and Sanitation. Cross-Cutting Issues: Epidemiology, Gender, Health Communication/Healthy Behavior, Health Policy and Advocacy, Health Systems, Human Resources/Training, Knowledge Management, Logistics and Supply Chain Management, Management and Governance, mHealth/eHealth/digital health, Monitoring and Evaluation, Scale Up, Youth.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信