MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401067440 · doi:10.1016/s2352-4642(24)00145-7

Intimate partner violence against adolescent girls: regional and national prevalence estimates and associated country-level factors

2024· article· en· W4401067440 on OpenAlexaff
Lynnmarie Sardinha, İlknur Yüksel‐Kaptanoğlu, Mathieu Maheu‐Giroux, Claudı́a Garcia‐Moreno

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Lancet Child & Adolescent Health · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIntimate Partner and Family Violence
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersDepartment for International Development, UK GovernmentWorld Health OrganizationForeign, Commonwealth and Development OfficeWorld Bank GroupCostco Wholesale
KeywordsDomestic violenceInjury preventionPoison controlSuicide preventionOccupational safety and healthDemographyHuman factors and ergonomicsPublic healthPsychologySexual violenceAdolescent healthMedicineEnvironmental healthCriminologySociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Intimate partner violence is a serious public health problem and negatively affects short-term and long-term health, development, and wellbeing of adolescent girls. Global estimates from WHO have shown that adolescent girls aged 15-19 years experience high rates of intimate partner violence. We aimed to estimate the lifetime and past-year prevalence and patterns of physical or sexual intimate partner violence against adolescent girls by male partners across 161 countries and areas, and to examine the country-level factors, including the prevalence of child marriage, associated with the lifetime and past-year prevalence of intimate partner violence in this age group. METHODS: These analyses used the 2018 global, regional, and country estimates on intimate partner violence published by WHO and economic, social, and political metadata from subject-specific databases. Drawing on data from the WHO Global Database on Prevalence of Violence Against Women, we used hierarchical Bayesian modelling techniques to estimate lifetime and past-year prevalence of physical or sexual (or both) intimate partner violence against adolescent girls aged 15-19 years by country. Linear regression methods were used to examine contextual social, economic, and political factors associated with intimate partner violence against adolescent girls in the 101 countries (lifetime prevalence) and 105 countries (past-year prevalence) for which these metadata were available. FINDINGS: The estimated global prevalence of physical or sexual intimate partner violence against ever-partnered adolescent girls aged 15-19 years was 24% (95% uncertainty interval 21-28) in their lifetime and 16% (14-19) in the past year. Prevalence varied greatly across countries and regions, with lifetime prevalence ranging from 6% (3-11) in Georgia to 49% (35-64) in Papua New Guinea. Overall, the prevalence of both lifetime (154 countries) and past-year (157 countries) intimate partner violence against adolescent girls was higher in low-income and lower-middle-income countries and regions than in high-income countries and regions. Countries with higher rates of female secondary school enrolment and those with inheritance laws that are more gender-equal had lower prevalence of intimate partner violence against adolescent girls. Lower-income countries and societies with a high prevalence of child marriage had higher prevalence of physical or sexual intimate partner violence against adolescent girls. INTERPRETATION: Our findings highlight the widespread prevalence of intimate partner violence against adolescent girls across the globe and its relationship with country-level contextual factors. They emphasise the need for promoting and ensuring policies and programmes that increase and ensure gender equality. Countries should strive to provide secondary education for all girls, ensure equal property rights for women, eliminate discriminatory gender norms, and address harmful practices such as child marriage. FUNDING: UN Women-WHO Joint Programme on Strengthening Violence Against Women Data funded by the UK Foreign and Commonwealth Development Office and the UNDP-UNFPA-UNICEF-WHO-World Bank Special Programme of Research, Development, and Research Training in Human Reproduction.

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)0.003
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 score0.049
Threshold uncertainty score0.098

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.072
GPT teacher head0.359
Teacher spread0.288 · 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

Citations57
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueThe Lancet Child & Adolescent HealthSame topicIntimate Partner and Family ViolenceFrench-language works237,207