Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Prevalence of Self-Reported Intimate Partner Violence Victimization Among Military Personnel: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Sparrow, Katherine; Dickson, Hannah; Kwan, Jamie; Howard, Louise; Fear, Nicola; MacManus, Deirdre.
Afiliação
  • Sparrow K; Forensic and Neurodevelopmental Sciences Department, King's College London, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, London, United Kingdom.
  • Dickson H; Forensic and Neurodevelopmental Sciences Department, King's College London, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, London, United Kingdom.
  • Kwan J; Department of Psychological Medicine, Weston Education Centre, London, United Kingdom.
  • Howard L; David Goldberg Centre, King's College London, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, London, United Kingdom.
  • Fear N; Department of Military Mental Health, Psychological Medicine, Weston Education Centre, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.
  • MacManus D; Forensic and Neurodevelopmental Sciences Department, King's College London, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, London, United Kingdom.
Trauma Violence Abuse ; 21(3): 586-609, 2020 07.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29911508
ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND:

Research on intimate partner violence (IPV) in the military has tended to focus on military personnel as perpetrators and civilian partners/spouses as victims. However, studies have found high levels of IPV victimization among military personnel. This article systematically reviews studies of the prevalence of self-reported IPV victimization among military populations.

METHODS:

Searches of four electronic databases (Embase, Medline, PsycINFO, and Web of Science) were supplemented by reference list screening. Meta-analyses of the available data were performed, where possible, using the random effects model.

RESULTS:

This review included 28 studies with a combined sample of 69,808 military participants. Overall, similar or higher prevalence rates of physical IPV victimization were found among males compared to females and this was supported by a meta-analytic subgroup

analysis:

pooled prevalence of 21% (95% confidence interval [CI] = [17.4, 24.6]) among males and 13.6% among females (95% CI [9.5, 17.7]). Psychological IPV was the most prevalent type of abuse, in keeping with findings from the general population. There were no studies on sexual IPV victimization among male personnel. Evidence for the impact of military factors, such as deployment or rank, on IPV victimization was conflicting.

DISCUSSION:

Prevalence rates varied widely, influenced by methodological variation among studies. The review highlighted the lack of research into male IPV victimization in the military and the relative absence of research into impact of IPV. It is recommended that future research disaggregates results by gender and considers the impact of IPV, in order that gender differences can be uncovered.
Assuntos
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Vítimas de Crime / Violência por Parceiro Íntimo / Militares Tipo de estudo: Prevalence_studies / Prognostic_studies / Risk_factors_studies / Systematic_reviews Limite: Adult / Female / Humans / Male Idioma: En Revista: Trauma Violence Abuse Assunto da revista: TRAUMATOLOGIA Ano de publicação: 2020 Tipo de documento: Article País de afiliação: Reino Unido

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Vítimas de Crime / Violência por Parceiro Íntimo / Militares Tipo de estudo: Prevalence_studies / Prognostic_studies / Risk_factors_studies / Systematic_reviews Limite: Adult / Female / Humans / Male Idioma: En Revista: Trauma Violence Abuse Assunto da revista: TRAUMATOLOGIA Ano de publicação: 2020 Tipo de documento: Article País de afiliação: Reino Unido