MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4365452248 · doi:10.1186/s12978-023-01606-y

Correlates of intimate partner violence among pregnant and parenting adolescents: a cross-sectional household survey in Blantyre District, Malawi

2023· article· en· W4365452248 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Juliet Amarachukwu Nwafor, Elita Chamdimba, Anthony Idowu Ajayi, Boniface Ayanbekongshie Ushie, Alister Munthali, Chrissie Thakwalakwa, Caroline W. Kabiru

Bibliographic record

VenueReproductive Health · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIntimate Partner and Family Violence
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAfrican Population and Health Research CenterInternational Development Research CentreStyrelsen för Internationellt Utvecklingssamarbete
KeywordsReproductive medicineCross-sectional studyDomestic violencePublic healthEnvironmental healthMedicineDemographyPsychologyPoison controlPregnancyInjury preventionNursingSociologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Despite efforts from the government and developmental partners to eliminate gender-based violence, intimate partner violence (IPV) remains a pervasive global health and human rights problem, affecting up to 753 million women and girls globally. Few studies on IPV have focused on pregnant and parenting adolescent (PPA) girls in Africa, although the region has the highest rates of adolescent childbearing. This limited attention results in the neglect of pregnant and parenting adolescents in policies and interventions addressing IPV in the region. Our study examined IPV prevalence and its individual, household, and community-level correlates among pregnant and parenting adolescent girls (10-19 years) in Blantyre District, Malawi. METHODS: We collected data from a cross-section of pregnant and parenting adolescent girls (n = 669) between March and May 2021. The girls responded to questions on socio-demographic and household characteristics, lifetime experience of IPV (i.e., sexual, physical, and emotional violence), and community-level safety nets. We used multilevel mixed-effect logistic regression models to examine the individual, household, and community-level factors associated with IPV. RESULTS: The lifetime prevalence of IPV was 39.7% (n = 266), with more girls reporting emotional (28.8%) than physical (22.2%) and sexual (17.4%) violence. At the individual level, girls with secondary education (AOR: 1.72; 95% CI: 1.16-2.54), who engaged in transactional sex (AOR: 2.29; 95% CI: 1.35-3.89), and accepted wife-beating (AOR: 1.97; 95% CI: 1.27-3.08) were significantly more likely to experience IPV compared to those with no education/primary education, who never engaged in transactional sex and rejected wife beating. Girls aged 19 (AOR: 0.49; 95% CI: 0.27-0.87) were less likely to report IPV than those aged 13-16. At the household level, girls with fair and poor partner support had higher odds of experiencing IPV, but the effect size did not reach a significant level in the parsimonious model. A high perception of neighborhood safety was associated with a lower likelihood of experiencing IPV (AOR: 0.81; 95% CI: 0.69-0.95). CONCLUSION: Intimate partner violence is rife among pregnant and parenting adolescent girls in Malawi, underscoring the need for appropriate interventions to curb the scourge. Interventions addressing IPV need to target younger adolescents, those engaging in transactional sex, and those having weaker community-level safety nets. Interventions to change social norms that drive the acceptance of gender-based violence are also warranted.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.052
Threshold uncertainty score0.103

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.080
GPT teacher head0.372
Teacher spread0.292 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations10
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReproductive HealthSame topicIntimate Partner and Family ViolenceFrench-language works237,207