Public health · 2016
Male and female physical intimate partner violence and socio-economic position: a cross-sectional international multicentre study in Europe.
СтатьяМногоцентровое исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Costa D, Hatzidimitriadou E, Ioannidi-Kapolou E, Lindert J, Soares J J F, Sundin Ö, Toth O, Barros H
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: This work explores the association between socio-economic position (SEP) and intimate partner violence (IPV) considering the perspectives of men and women as victims, perpetrators and as both (bidirectional).
STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional international multicentre study.
METHODS: A sample of 3496 men and women, (aged 18-64 years), randomly selected from the general population of residents from six European cities was assessed: Athens; Budapest; London; Östersund; Porto; and Stuttgart. Their education (primary, secondary and university), occupation (upper white collar, lower white collar and blue collar) and unemployment duration (never, ≤12 months and >12 months) were considered as SEP indicators and physical IPV was measured with the Revised Conflict Tactics Scales.
RESULTS: Past year physical IPV was declared by 17.7% of women (3.5% victims, 4.2% perpetrators and 10.0% bidirectional) and 19.8% of men (4.1% victims, 3.8% perpetrators and 11.9% bidirectional). Low educational level (primary vs university) was associated with female victimisation (adjusted odds ratio, 95% confidence interval: 3.2; 1.3-8.0) and with female bidirectional IPV (4.1, 2.4-7.1). Blue collar occupation (vs upper white) was associated with female victimisation (2.1, 1.1-4.0), female perpetration (3.0, 1.3-6.8) and female bidirectional IPV (4.0, 2.3-7.0). Unemployment duration was associated with male perpetration (>12 months of unemployment vs never unemployed: 3.8; 1.7-8.7) and with bidirectional IPV in both sex (women: 1.8, 1.2-2.7; men: 1.7, 1.0-2.8).
CONCLUSIONS: In these European centres, physical IPV was associated with a disadvantaged SEP. A consistent socio-economic gradient was observed in female bidirectional involvement, but victims or perpetrators-only presented gender specificities according to levels of education, occupation differentiation and unemployment duration potentially useful for designing interventions.
STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional international multicentre study.
METHODS: A sample of 3496 men and women, (aged 18-64 years), randomly selected from the general population of residents from six European cities was assessed: Athens; Budapest; London; Östersund; Porto; and Stuttgart. Their education (primary, secondary and university), occupation (upper white collar, lower white collar and blue collar) and unemployment duration (never, ≤12 months and >12 months) were considered as SEP indicators and physical IPV was measured with the Revised Conflict Tactics Scales.
RESULTS: Past year physical IPV was declared by 17.7% of women (3.5% victims, 4.2% perpetrators and 10.0% bidirectional) and 19.8% of men (4.1% victims, 3.8% perpetrators and 11.9% bidirectional). Low educational level (primary vs university) was associated with female victimisation (adjusted odds ratio, 95% confidence interval: 3.2; 1.3-8.0) and with female bidirectional IPV (4.1, 2.4-7.1). Blue collar occupation (vs upper white) was associated with female victimisation (2.1, 1.1-4.0), female perpetration (3.0, 1.3-6.8) and female bidirectional IPV (4.0, 2.3-7.0). Unemployment duration was associated with male perpetration (>12 months of unemployment vs never unemployed: 3.8; 1.7-8.7) and with bidirectional IPV in both sex (women: 1.8, 1.2-2.7; men: 1.7, 1.0-2.8).
CONCLUSIONS: In these European centres, physical IPV was associated with a disadvantaged SEP. A consistent socio-economic gradient was observed in female bidirectional involvement, but victims or perpetrators-only presented gender specificities according to levels of education, occupation differentiation and unemployment duration potentially useful for designing interventions.