Intimate partner violence among women in Spain: the impact of regional-level male unemployment and income inequality
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Intimate partner violence (IPV) against women is a complex worldwide public health problem. There is scarce research on the independent effect on IPV exerted by structural factors such as labour and economic policies, economic inequalities and gender inequality. OBJECTIVE: To analyse the association, in Spain, between contextual variables of regional unemployment and income inequality and individual women's likelihood of IPV, independently of the women's characteristics. METHOD: We conducted multilevel logistic regression to analyse cross-sectional data from the 2011 Spanish Macrosurvey of Gender-based Violence which included 7898 adult women. The first level of analyses was the individual women' characteristics and the second level was the region of residence. RESULTS: Of the survey participants, 12.2% reported lifetime IPV. The region of residence accounted for 3.5% of the total variability in IPV prevalence. We determined a direct association between regional male long-term unemployment and IPV likelihood (P = 0.007) and between the Gini Index for the regional income inequality and IPV likelihood (P < 0.001). Women residing in a region with higher gender-based income discrimination are at a lower likelihood of IPV than those residing in a region with low gender-based income discrimination (odds ratio = 0.64, 95% confidence intervals: 0.55-0.75). CONCLUSIONS: Growing regional unemployment rates and income inequalities increase women's likelihood of IPV. In times of economic downturn, like the current one in Spain, this association may translate into an increase in women's vulnerability to IPV.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".