Home
Issues
Aim and Scope
Open Access
Editorial Board
Indexing
Why publish with us
Contact Us
Instructions to Authors (PDF)
Manuscript Types
Manuscript Formatting
How to submit
Preprints
Special publications & Reprints
Authorship & COI
Principles of Transparency Checklist
Data Policies
Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement
Crossmark
Supporting Diversity
Comparing estimates of intimate-partner violence against women across different data sources in brazil
1
Institute for health metrics and evaluation/university of washington population Health Building/Hans Rosling Center 3980 15th Ave. NE, Seattle, WA 98195 USA UW Campus Box #351615 United States
2
Center for Epidemiological Research/Universidade Federal de Pelotas | UFPEL Center for Epidemiological Research Rua Marechal Deodoro, 1160 - 3° Piso Bairro Centro - Pelotas, RS Cep: 96020-220 - Caixa Postal 464 Tel/fax +55 (53) 3284 - 1300 Brazil
Publication date: 2023-04-26
Popul. Med. 2023;5(Supplement):A1957
ABSTRACT
Background and objective:
Intimate partner violence (ipv) is a global public health problem. Initial work suggests that ipv prevalence estimates vary by the type of data used. This study aims to evaluate and compare ipv estimates from three national data sources in brazil.
Methods:
We compare estimates of ipv for 2019 from three data sources (violence and accident surveillance system-viva/sinan, national health survey-pns, and data senado research-dsr). We explored the similarities and differences among data sources. Then we estimated the proportion of total cases and prevalence by age group (16-29, 30-39, 40-49, 50-59, and 60+) and type of violence (physical, psychological, sexual) in the last 12 months.
Results:
The data show the largest differences for the 16-29 age group: for physical ipv, viva/sinan had 43% proportion of total cases, and dsr and pns had 35% and 33%, respectively. For psychological ipv, 38% of total cases were in the 16-29 age group for viva/sinan, 27% for pns, and 32% for dsr. other age groups were more similar across data sources, and the pattern for sexual ipv differed mainly for 30-39 year olds. population prevalence estimates varied across all data sources. Physical ipv prevalence was higher in the 16-29 age group, ranging from 4% in the pns to 11% in dsr. psychological ipv also showed large prevalence differences between pns (9%) and dsr (29%) for the 16-29 age group. Ipv prevalence estimates from viva/sinan were lowest across all age groups.
Conclusion:
Comparing three national data sources showed differences in reporting ipv. This could be due to differences in questionnaires, privacy during the interview, stigma and safety concerns associated with reporting experiences of violence. understanding the differences across types of data sources and survey instruments is critical to improving the measurement of ipv in brazil and around the world.
Intimate partner violence (ipv) is a global public health problem. Initial work suggests that ipv prevalence estimates vary by the type of data used. This study aims to evaluate and compare ipv estimates from three national data sources in brazil.
Methods:
We compare estimates of ipv for 2019 from three data sources (violence and accident surveillance system-viva/sinan, national health survey-pns, and data senado research-dsr). We explored the similarities and differences among data sources. Then we estimated the proportion of total cases and prevalence by age group (16-29, 30-39, 40-49, 50-59, and 60+) and type of violence (physical, psychological, sexual) in the last 12 months.
Results:
The data show the largest differences for the 16-29 age group: for physical ipv, viva/sinan had 43% proportion of total cases, and dsr and pns had 35% and 33%, respectively. For psychological ipv, 38% of total cases were in the 16-29 age group for viva/sinan, 27% for pns, and 32% for dsr. other age groups were more similar across data sources, and the pattern for sexual ipv differed mainly for 30-39 year olds. population prevalence estimates varied across all data sources. Physical ipv prevalence was higher in the 16-29 age group, ranging from 4% in the pns to 11% in dsr. psychological ipv also showed large prevalence differences between pns (9%) and dsr (29%) for the 16-29 age group. Ipv prevalence estimates from viva/sinan were lowest across all age groups.
Conclusion:
Comparing three national data sources showed differences in reporting ipv. This could be due to differences in questionnaires, privacy during the interview, stigma and safety concerns associated with reporting experiences of violence. understanding the differences across types of data sources and survey instruments is critical to improving the measurement of ipv in brazil and around the world.
| ISSN: | 2654-1459 |
We process personal data collected when visiting the website. The function of obtaining information about users and their behavior is carried out by voluntarily entered information in forms and saving cookies in end devices. Data, including cookies, are used to provide services, improve the user experience and to analyze the traffic in accordance with the Privacy policy. Data are also collected and processed by Google Analytics tool (more).
You can change cookies settings in your browser. Restricted use of cookies in the browser configuration may affect some functionalities of the website.
You can change cookies settings in your browser. Restricted use of cookies in the browser configuration may affect some functionalities of the website.
