Gender-based violence and associated factors among internally displaced and refugee women in Africa: A scoping review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Although Africa has a large population of displaced women, there is no current review of literature on gender-based violence (GBV) among this population. This scoping review study aimed to map the literature on GBV among women of reproductive age (15-49 years) living in refugee and IDP camps in Africa in the years 2019 to 2024. Method: A literature search was conducted for full-text peer-reviewed original research articles published in English, which included women of reproductive age in refugee and internally displaced camps over five years. Results: The prevalence of GBV ranged from 4.7% to 85.8%. Perpetrators of GBV and reporting of GBV were mostly (63.3%) from the host communities in Nigeria. The associated factors of GBV include individual-level factors, community factors, and lack of social support and social protection. Discussion: Although the scope was limited by a few databases, this review provides current evidence and a summary of GBV in Africa. Conclusion: Although mostly high, there was variation in the prevalence of GBV in many African countries. There may be a need for educational intervention to mitigate GBV in Africa. More longitudinal and experimental research is recommended for causal inferences on GBV and displaced women in Africa.
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 | 0.004 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".