Sexual Risk Factors Associated with Intimate Partner Violence Against Women in Rwanda: A Couples-Based Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The goal of this study was to measure the prevalence of intimate partner violence (IPV) against women and to examine the independent association of sexual risk factors of women and their husbands/partners with IPV. We used data from 2,169 couples from the 2005 Rwanda Demographic and Health Survey. Face-to-face interviews were conducted, and multiple logistic regression was used to calculate adjusted odds ratios (AOR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). A total of 560 (29.2%), 415 (22.2%), and 233 (12.4%) women reported any physical, psychological, or sexual IPV, respectively. History of genital ulcer in women was significantly associated with psychological IPV (AOR: 2.77; 95% CI: 1.67-4.59), whereas history of genital ulcer reported by husbands/partners was significantly associated with sexual IPV (AOR 2.80, 95% CI: 1.08-7.29). The number of lifetime sexual partners of husbands was positively associated with increasing odds of their wives being exposed to psychological IPV (p = 0.025) and physical IPV (p = .017). In a representative sample of couples, husbands/partners' sexual risk factors were associated with IPV reported by their wives. Genital ulcer appeared to be a risk marker for the presence of IPV victimization/perpetration.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".