Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Secondary analysis reveals declining national spousal violence but widening regional disparities among married women, highlighting the need for targeted subnational interventions.
Background: Intimate partner violence (IPV) remains a major public health and human rights concern. Evidence comparing the prevalence of IPV between National Family Health Survey-5 (NFHS-5) and the recently released NFHS-6 remains limited. This study compared the prevalence of physical and/or sexual spousal violence between NFHS-5 and NFHS-6 and examined state- and union territory-level disparities. Materials and Methods: A descriptive secondary analysis was conducted using publicly available aggregate data from the India and state/union territory fact sheets of NFHS-5 (2019–2021) and NFHS-6 (2023–2024). National and state-/union territory-level prevalence of physical and/or sexual spousal violence among ever-married women aged 18–49 years was compared, and absolute percentage-point changes were calculated. Results: The national prevalence declined from 29.2% in NFHS-5 to 22.3% in NFHS-6, an absolute reduction of 6.9 percentage points. Karnataka recorded the largest decline (−30.3 percentage points), followed by Assam (−16.0) and Delhi (−10.2). In contrast, Kerala (+7.9), Tamil Nadu (+2.6), Telangana (+0.6), and Rajasthan (+0.1) showed increases in percentage points. Bihar (36.1%), Telangana (30.8%), Tamil Nadu (28.5%), Uttar Pradesh (28.5%), and Jharkhand (27.0%) had the highest prevalence in NFHS-6. Conclusions: Although India experienced a substantial decline in physical and/or sexual spousal violence between NFHS-5 and NFHS-6, considerable state- and union territory-level disparities were observed. Targeted, context-specific interventions are needed to reduce the burden in high-prevalence regions.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sharma et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: