{"title":"2019冠状病毒病大流行期间亲密伴侣暴力侵害妇女行为的流行程度及其影响因素:系统综述和荟萃分析","authors":"Sulmaz Ghahramani, Bita Najjari, Reza Bayattork, Morteza Arab-Zozani","doi":"10.47176/mjiri.38.104","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>It seems that the prevalence of intimate partner violence increased during the COVID-19 pandemic. To investigate the prevalence of different types of IPV and its contributing factors on a global scale during the COVID-19 pandemic.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This is a systematic review and meta-analysis study. This study followed the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) checklist. All original studies, written in English that reported the overall prevalence of IPV or at least one type of IPV against women during the COVID-19 pandemic were included in this study. PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Web of Science databases were searched in July 2023. Our general keywords included \"Intimate Partner Violence\", \"Spouse Abuse\", \"Domestic Violence\", \"COVID-19\", and \"SARS-CoV-2\". We used the Joanna Briggs Institute Checklist to assess the quality of all included studies. We conducted a random effect model for meta-analysis using the Mantel-Haenszel method in comprehensive meta-analysis software Version 3. Each type of IPV is calculated as an event rate with a 95% CI for each variable. The I2 statistic test was used to assess the Heterogeneity.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Forty-one studies encompassing 14,615 participants met our eligibility criteria and were included in our study. The overall prevalence of IPV was 31% (95% CI: [24.2, 38.8], <i>P</i> < 0.001). Based on type, the highest rate of IPV in the included studies was reported for psychological type (33%, 95% CI: [23.4, 44.3], <i>P</i> = 0.004). The rates of IPV for economic, physical, and sexual types were 19.1% (95% CI: [12.2, 28.6], <i>P</i> < 0.001), 9.5% (95% CI: [6.8, 13.1], <i>P</i> < 0.001), and 8.5% (95% CI: [6.2, 11.7], <i>P</i> < 0.001), respectively. Age, education level, being pregnant, and marital duration were among the most frequent influencing factors.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>About one-third of women experienced IPV during the COVID-19 pandemic. Psychological IPV emerged as the most prevalent type in the included studies. The most important factors were environmental, social, economic, cultural, and political factors. Age, education level, marital duration, being pregnant, and marital duration were among the most frequent influencing factors.</p>","PeriodicalId":18361,"journal":{"name":"Medical Journal of the Islamic Republic of Iran","volume":"38 ","pages":"104"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11707718/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Prevalence and Factor Influencing Intimate Partner Violence against Women during COVID-19 Pandemic: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Sulmaz Ghahramani, Bita Najjari, Reza Bayattork, Morteza Arab-Zozani\",\"doi\":\"10.47176/mjiri.38.104\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>It seems that the prevalence of intimate partner violence increased during the COVID-19 pandemic. To investigate the prevalence of different types of IPV and its contributing factors on a global scale during the COVID-19 pandemic.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This is a systematic review and meta-analysis study. This study followed the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) checklist. All original studies, written in English that reported the overall prevalence of IPV or at least one type of IPV against women during the COVID-19 pandemic were included in this study. PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Web of Science databases were searched in July 2023. Our general keywords included \\\"Intimate Partner Violence\\\", \\\"Spouse Abuse\\\", \\\"Domestic Violence\\\", \\\"COVID-19\\\", and \\\"SARS-CoV-2\\\". We used the Joanna Briggs Institute Checklist to assess the quality of all included studies. We conducted a random effect model for meta-analysis using the Mantel-Haenszel method in comprehensive meta-analysis software Version 3. Each type of IPV is calculated as an event rate with a 95% CI for each variable. The I2 statistic test was used to assess the Heterogeneity.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Forty-one studies encompassing 14,615 participants met our eligibility criteria and were included in our study. The overall prevalence of IPV was 31% (95% CI: [24.2, 38.8], <i>P</i> < 0.001). Based on type, the highest rate of IPV in the included studies was reported for psychological type (33%, 95% CI: [23.4, 44.3], <i>P</i> = 0.004). The rates of IPV for economic, physical, and sexual types were 19.1% (95% CI: [12.2, 28.6], <i>P</i> < 0.001), 9.5% (95% CI: [6.8, 13.1], <i>P</i> < 0.001), and 8.5% (95% CI: [6.2, 11.7], <i>P</i> < 0.001), respectively. Age, education level, being pregnant, and marital duration were among the most frequent influencing factors.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>About one-third of women experienced IPV during the COVID-19 pandemic. Psychological IPV emerged as the most prevalent type in the included studies. The most important factors were environmental, social, economic, cultural, and political factors. Age, education level, marital duration, being pregnant, and marital duration were among the most frequent influencing factors.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":18361,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Medical Journal of the Islamic Republic of Iran\",\"volume\":\"38 \",\"pages\":\"104\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11707718/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Medical Journal of the Islamic Republic of Iran\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.47176/mjiri.38.104\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medical Journal of the Islamic Republic of Iran","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.47176/mjiri.38.104","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景:在2019冠状病毒病大流行期间,亲密伴侣暴力的发生率似乎有所上升。目的调查2019冠状病毒病大流行期间全球不同类型IPV的流行情况及其影响因素。方法:这是一项系统综述和荟萃分析研究。本研究遵循系统评价和荟萃分析(PRISMA)清单的首选报告项目。本研究纳入了所有用英文撰写的原始研究,这些研究报告了COVID-19大流行期间IPV或至少一种IPV对女性的总体流行情况。在2023年7月检索了PubMed、Embase、Scopus和Web of Science数据库。我们的关键词包括“亲密伴侣暴力”、“配偶虐待”、“家庭暴力”、“COVID-19”和“SARS-CoV-2”。我们使用乔安娜布里格斯研究所检查表来评估所有纳入研究的质量。我们在综合meta分析软件Version 3中使用Mantel-Haenszel方法进行随机效应模型进行meta分析。每种类型的IPV被计算为每个变量具有95% CI的事件率。采用I2统计检验评估异质性。结果:41项研究包括14615名参与者符合我们的资格标准并被纳入我们的研究。IPV的总患病率为31% (95% CI: [24.2, 38.8], P < 0.001)。根据类型,在纳入的研究中,心理类型的IPV发生率最高(33%,95% CI: [23.4, 44.3], P = 0.004)。经济类型、身体类型和性类型的IPV发生率分别为19.1% (95% CI: [12.2, 28.6], P < 0.001)、9.5% (95% CI: [6.8, 13.1], P < 0.001)和8.5% (95% CI: [6.2, 11.7], P < 0.001)。年龄、受教育程度、是否怀孕和婚姻持续时间是最常见的影响因素。结论:在COVID-19大流行期间,约有三分之一的女性经历了IPV。在纳入的研究中,心理IPV成为最普遍的类型。最重要的因素是环境、社会、经济、文化和政治因素。年龄、受教育程度、婚姻持续时间、是否怀孕和婚姻持续时间是最常见的影响因素。
Prevalence and Factor Influencing Intimate Partner Violence against Women during COVID-19 Pandemic: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Background: It seems that the prevalence of intimate partner violence increased during the COVID-19 pandemic. To investigate the prevalence of different types of IPV and its contributing factors on a global scale during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Methods: This is a systematic review and meta-analysis study. This study followed the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) checklist. All original studies, written in English that reported the overall prevalence of IPV or at least one type of IPV against women during the COVID-19 pandemic were included in this study. PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Web of Science databases were searched in July 2023. Our general keywords included "Intimate Partner Violence", "Spouse Abuse", "Domestic Violence", "COVID-19", and "SARS-CoV-2". We used the Joanna Briggs Institute Checklist to assess the quality of all included studies. We conducted a random effect model for meta-analysis using the Mantel-Haenszel method in comprehensive meta-analysis software Version 3. Each type of IPV is calculated as an event rate with a 95% CI for each variable. The I2 statistic test was used to assess the Heterogeneity.
Results: Forty-one studies encompassing 14,615 participants met our eligibility criteria and were included in our study. The overall prevalence of IPV was 31% (95% CI: [24.2, 38.8], P < 0.001). Based on type, the highest rate of IPV in the included studies was reported for psychological type (33%, 95% CI: [23.4, 44.3], P = 0.004). The rates of IPV for economic, physical, and sexual types were 19.1% (95% CI: [12.2, 28.6], P < 0.001), 9.5% (95% CI: [6.8, 13.1], P < 0.001), and 8.5% (95% CI: [6.2, 11.7], P < 0.001), respectively. Age, education level, being pregnant, and marital duration were among the most frequent influencing factors.
Conclusion: About one-third of women experienced IPV during the COVID-19 pandemic. Psychological IPV emerged as the most prevalent type in the included studies. The most important factors were environmental, social, economic, cultural, and political factors. Age, education level, marital duration, being pregnant, and marital duration were among the most frequent influencing factors.