Dataset Information

Ecological pathways to prevention: How does the SASA! community mobilisation model work to prevent physical intimate partner violence against women?

ABSTRACT: Intimate partner violence (IPV) against women is a global public health concern. While community-level gender norms and attitudes to IPV are recognised drivers of IPV risk, there is little evidence on how interventions might tackle these drivers to prevent IPV at the community-level. This secondary analysis of data from the SASA! study explores the pathways through which SASA!, a community mobilisation intervention to prevent violence against women, achieved community-wide reductions in physical IPV.From 2007 to 2012 a cluster randomised controlled trial (CRT) was conducted in eight communities in Kampala, Uganda. Cross-sectional surveys of a random sample of community members, aged 18-49, were undertaken at baseline (n?=?1583) and 4 years post intervention implementation (n?=?2532). We used cluster-level intention to treat analysis to estimate SASA!'s community-level impact on women's past year experience of physical IPV and men's past year perpetration of IPV. The mediating roles of community-, relationship- and individual-level factors in intervention effect on past year physical IPV experience (women)/perpetration (men) were explored using modified Poisson regression models.SASA! was associated with reductions in women's past year experience of physical IPV (0.48, 95 % CI 0.16-1.39), as well as men's perpetration of IPV (0.39, 95 % CI 0.20-0.73). Community-level normative attitudes were the most important mediators of intervention impact on physical IPV risk, with norms around the acceptability of IPV explaining 70 % of the intervention effect on women's experience of IPV and 95 % of the effect on men's perpetration. The strongest relationship-level mediators were men's reduced suspicion of partner infidelity (explaining 22 % of effect on men's perpetration), and improved communication around sex (explaining 16 % of effect on women's experience). Reduced acceptability of IPV among men was the most important individual-level mediator (explaining 42 % of effect on men's perpetration).These results highlight the important role of community-level norm-change in achieving community-wide reductions in IPV risk. They lend strong support for the more widespread adoption of community-level approaches to preventing violence.ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00790959 . Registered 13th November 2008. The study protocol is available at: http://www.trialsjournal.com/content/13/1/96.

SUBMITTER: Abramsky T

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4833941 | biostudies-literature | 2016 Apr

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Ecological pathways to prevention: How does the SASA! community mobilisation model work to prevent physical intimate partner violence against women?

Abramsky Tanya T Devries Karen M KM Michau Lori L Nakuti Janet J Musuya Tina T Kiss Ligia L Kyegombe Nambusi N Watts Charlotte C

BMC public health 20160416

<h4>Background</h4>Intimate partner violence (IPV) against women is a global public health concern. While community-level gender norms and attitudes to IPV are recognised drivers of IPV risk, there is little evidence on how interventions might tackle these drivers to prevent IPV at the community-level. This secondary analysis of data from the SASA! study explores the pathways through which SASA!, a community mobilisation intervention to prevent violence against women, achieved community-wide red ...[more]

PMID: 27084116

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceTransgender and gender-diverse (TGD) communities experience disproportionate levels of violence, yet due to limitations in measuring TGD identity, few state-representative estimates are available.ObjectiveTo assess gender identity differences in experiences of violence among adults.Design, setting, and participantsCross-sectional data from the 2023 California Violence Experiences (CalVEX) survey, weighted to provide state-representative estimates, was used to assess associations between gender identity and past-year experiences of violence among adults 18 years and older. Data were analyzed from June to December 2023.ExposureGender identity (cisgender women, cisgender men, transgender women, transgender men, and nonbinary individuals).Main outcomes and measuresExperience of physical violence (including physical abuse and threat or use of a weapon), sexual violence (verbal sexual harassment, homophobic or transphobic slurs, cyber and physically aggressive sexual harassment, and forced sex), and intimate partner violence (IPV; emotional, physical, or sexual violence) using age-adjusted logistic regression.ResultsIn total 3560 individuals (weighted cumulative response rate, 5%) completed the 2023 CalVEX survey, with 1978 cisgender women, 1431 cisgender men, 35 transgender women, 52 transgender men, and 64 nonbinary respondents (mean [SD] age, 47.1 [17.5] years; 635 [17%] were Asian, 839 [37%] were Hispanic, and 1159 [37%] were White). Past-year physical violence was reported by 22 transgender men (43%), 9 transgender women (24%), and 9 nonbinary respondents (14%). Past-year sexual violence was reported by 23 transgender men (42%), 11 transgender women (14%), and 31 nonbinary respondents (56%). Compared with cisgender women, transgender women and transgender men had greater risk of past-year physical violence (any form) (transgender women adjusted incidence rate ratio [AIRR], 6.7; 95% CI, 2.5-18.2; transgender men AIRR, 9.7; 95% CI, 5.3-17.7), as well as past-year IPV (any form) (transgender women AIRR, 3.2; 95% CI, 1.3-8.0; transgender men AIRR, 6.7; 95% CI, 4.0-11.3). Relative to cisgender women, transgender men (AIRR, 3.0; 95% CI, 1.7-5.1) and nonbinary respondents (AIRR, 3.3; 95% CI, 2.1-5.2) had greater risk of past-year sexual violence (any form).Conclusions and relevanceIn this survey study of adults in California, results showed that TGD individuals, especially transgender men, are at higher risk of experiencing all forms of violence relative to cisgender women. Results highlight the need for gender-affirming violence prevention and intervention services as well as policies that protect TGD individuals from discriminatory violence.

Project description:IntroductionVictims of intimate partner violence (IPV), or those individuals susceptible to IPV victimisation or perpetration, may benefit from participation in primary, secondary or tertiary interventions to address or mitigate exposure to violence despite mixed evidence of IPV intervention effectiveness. However, participation in such programmes is limited by poor access, sociocultural barriers and programme cost. As the world fast approaches universal access to the internet, web-based technologies and low-cost smartphones, new avenues to provide preventive health services including mobile health (mHealth) tools, platforms and services have emerged. The objective of this systematic review is to assess current web-based and mHealth interventions, which include web-based or mobile-based delivery methods for IPV prevention. Interpersonal violence is defined as perpetration or victimisation of a physical, psychological or sexual nature among adults. Interventions may be at the primary, secondary or tertiary level of the public health model.Methods and analysisThis systematic review will incorporate studies focused on any empirical prevention intervention intended for IPV victims or perpetrators of any gender where one or more components is web based or mobile based. Articles will be retrieved from the following academic databases: MEDLINE/PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, PsycInfo and Open Grey, as well Google Scholar. Results will be limited to articles reporting primary data, published since 1998, and in English, Spanish, Portuguese or French. Data extraction procedures will follow Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses reporting guidelines. The Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool, a critical appraisal tool, will be used to record ratings of quality and risk of bias among studies selected for inclusion. Content analysis and between-study comparisons will be used to answer the objectives of this review.Ethics and disseminationResults from this review will be published in an open access format for the benefit of both academic and non-academic audiences, including community organisations and individuals seeking mHealth strategies to reduce and prevent IPV.Trial registration numberCRD42019123006.

Dataset Information

Ecological pathways to prevention: How does the SASA! community mobilisation model work to prevent physical intimate partner violence against women?

Publications

Ecological pathways to prevention: How does the SASA! community mobilisation model work to prevent physical intimate partner violence against women?

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets