Understanding the population distribution and dynamics of intimate partner violence (IPV) perpetration is necessary for designing effective prevention strategies and informing public health responses. While general population health surveys are widely used to estimate the prevalence and burden of IPV victimisation, the extent to which they capture IPV perpetration is under-explored. This review systematically identified and assessed general population health surveys measuring IPV perpetration, focusing on their methodological and measurement approaches. Searches of four electronic databases identified 39 papers reporting on 27 survey data sources. Five broad categories of measurement tools are described: survey data sources using or adapting the UN Multi-Country Study; the 2005 WHO research tool for violence against women and girls; the Conflicts Tactics Scale (CTS) and its subsequent versions, and two categories of ad hoc measures (with either more than two items, or one or two items). Substantial variation was found in the measurement of forms of IPV perpetration measured, particularly in the inclusion of non-physical forms, the use of frequency and reference periods, and the assessment of harm. Most surveys did not collect information on the sex or number of victims, escalation, or repeat perpetration, and few described item development or validation. Improved and standardised measurement of IPV perpetration in general population health surveys is essential to strengthen the evidence base and inform effective prevention strategies, service responses, and public policy.
Bhavsar et al. (Tue,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: