Community-based IPV interventions were multifaceted and addressed distal as well as proximal factors and behaviors (e.g., socio-cultural, structural, familial, interpersonal, and individual) that contribute to IPV.
|
|
Participation in community-based interventions reduced the likelihood of experiencing physical violence by 50% (OR = 0.50, p = 0.004), psychological IPV by 58% (OR = 0.42, p = 0.003), and reduced the acceptance of IPV among study participants by 37% (OR = 0.63, p = 0.009). The meta-analysis results indicate that individuals did not report experiencing significantly lower levels of sexual IPV after participation in community programs (OR = 0.58, p = 0.164). See Table 2 for more detail.
|
The individually focused and couple-based interventions, despite having the shortest durations (1–2 months), showed significant evidence of intervention efficacy in reducing IPV ([39] as well as marital conflict and marital sexual coercion [45])
|
Interventions that conducted root-cause analysis with beneficiary populations and then used this information on structural, community, cultural, familial, relational, and/or individually based drivers of IPV to guide intervention design and activities, achieved greater reductions in violence, including IPV, and significantly large improvements in attitudes about violence against women [37,42,44]
|
Interventions with young adults reported reductions in sexual abuse, perpetration of physical violence, and substance use, and improvements in mental health, knowledge and attitudes about gender, reproductive and sexual health, sexual violence, and healthy relationships [37,41,43]. This age group may present an optimal population for primary-prevention IPV interventions, as information on healthy relationships, gender, reproductive and sexual health, and substance use may be timely—of great interest and usefulness [37,41,43]
|