0
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Prevalence & Correlates of Intimate Partner Violence During COVID-19: A Rapid Review

      research-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, governments enacted a range of public health measures aimed at preventing the spread of the virus. These measures resulted in school closures, social isolation, and job loss, which all contributed to increased psychosocial stress, particularly among families with pre-existing vulnerability factors. Given the relationship between increased psychosocial stress and intimate partner violence (IPV), this rapid review investigated change in the prevalence and correlates of IPV victimization during the first six months of the pandemic. PsycINFO, MEDLINE, Embase, PubMed, Scopus, and the Cochrane COVID-19 registry were reviewed. This search resulted in 255 unique results, of which 24 studies were included. There were 19 studies that examined changes in the rate of IPV from before the COVID-19 pandemic to during the pandemic. Of the studies examining changes in the rate of IPV, 11 found a significant increase. Key vulnerability factors contributing to the increase include low socioeconomic status, unemployment, a personal or familial COVID-19 diagnosis, family mental illness, or overcrowding. Six studies examined whether the presence of children in the home was associated with IPV, but the direction of this relationship was inconsistent. This review finds preliminary evidence of a relationship between COVID-19 induced stressors, pre-existing vulnerabilities, and increased IPV, which present important implications for policy and practice.

          Related collections

          Most cited references29

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          A brief measure for assessing generalized anxiety disorder: the GAD-7.

          Generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) is one of the most common mental disorders; however, there is no brief clinical measure for assessing GAD. The objective of this study was to develop a brief self-report scale to identify probable cases of GAD and evaluate its reliability and validity. A criterion-standard study was performed in 15 primary care clinics in the United States from November 2004 through June 2005. Of a total of 2740 adult patients completing a study questionnaire, 965 patients had a telephone interview with a mental health professional within 1 week. For criterion and construct validity, GAD self-report scale diagnoses were compared with independent diagnoses made by mental health professionals; functional status measures; disability days; and health care use. A 7-item anxiety scale (GAD-7) had good reliability, as well as criterion, construct, factorial, and procedural validity. A cut point was identified that optimized sensitivity (89%) and specificity (82%). Increasing scores on the scale were strongly associated with multiple domains of functional impairment (all 6 Medical Outcomes Study Short-Form General Health Survey scales and disability days). Although GAD and depression symptoms frequently co-occurred, factor analysis confirmed them as distinct dimensions. Moreover, GAD and depression symptoms had differing but independent effects on functional impairment and disability. There was good agreement between self-report and interviewer-administered versions of the scale. The GAD-7 is a valid and efficient tool for screening for GAD and assessing its severity in clinical practice and research.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            The PHQ-9: validity of a brief depression severity measure.

            While considerable attention has focused on improving the detection of depression, assessment of severity is also important in guiding treatment decisions. Therefore, we examined the validity of a brief, new measure of depression severity. The Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ) is a self-administered version of the PRIME-MD diagnostic instrument for common mental disorders. The PHQ-9 is the depression module, which scores each of the 9 DSM-IV criteria as "0" (not at all) to "3" (nearly every day). The PHQ-9 was completed by 6,000 patients in 8 primary care clinics and 7 obstetrics-gynecology clinics. Construct validity was assessed using the 20-item Short-Form General Health Survey, self-reported sick days and clinic visits, and symptom-related difficulty. Criterion validity was assessed against an independent structured mental health professional (MHP) interview in a sample of 580 patients. As PHQ-9 depression severity increased, there was a substantial decrease in functional status on all 6 SF-20 subscales. Also, symptom-related difficulty, sick days, and health care utilization increased. Using the MHP reinterview as the criterion standard, a PHQ-9 score > or =10 had a sensitivity of 88% and a specificity of 88% for major depression. PHQ-9 scores of 5, 10, 15, and 20 represented mild, moderate, moderately severe, and severe depression, respectively. Results were similar in the primary care and obstetrics-gynecology samples. In addition to making criteria-based diagnoses of depressive disorders, the PHQ-9 is also a reliable and valid measure of depression severity. These characteristics plus its brevity make the PHQ-9 a useful clinical and research tool.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Risk and resilience in family well-being during the COVID-19 pandemic.

              The COVID-19 pandemic poses an acute threat to the well-being of children and families due to challenges related to social disruption such as financial insecurity, caregiving burden, and confinement-related stress (e.g., crowding, changes to structure, and routine). The consequences of these difficulties are likely to be longstanding, in part because of the ways in which contextual risk permeates the structures and processes of family systems. The current article draws from pertinent literature across topic areas of acute crises and long-term, cumulative risk to illustrate the multitude of ways in which the well-being of children and families may be at risk during COVID-19. The presented conceptual framework is based on systemic models of human development and family functioning and links social disruption due to COVID-19 to child adjustment through a cascading process involving caregiver well-being and family processes (i.e., organization, communication, and beliefs). An illustration of the centrality of family processes in buffering against risk in the context of COVID-19, as well as promoting resilience through shared family beliefs and close relationships, is provided. Finally, clinical and research implications are discussed. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                am4mcnei@uwaterloo.ca
                l3hicks@uwaterloo.ca
                busra.yalcinoz@uwaterloo.ca
                Dillon.browne@uwaterloo.ca
                Journal
                J Fam Violence
                J Fam Violence
                Journal of Family Violence
                Springer US (New York )
                0885-7482
                1573-2851
                29 March 2022
                : 1-21
                Affiliations
                GRID grid.46078.3d, ISNI 0000 0000 8644 1405, Department of Psychology, , University of Waterloo, ; 200 University Ave West, Waterloo, Ontario N2L 3G1 Canada
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0861-693X
                http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6307-5796
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8335-6779
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7445-6604
                Article
                386
                10.1007/s10896-022-00386-6
                8961087
                35368512
                3c484826-53b8-42cb-b3c5-784e9bbf7ae5
                © The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2022

                This article is made available via the PMC Open Access Subset for unrestricted research re-use and secondary analysis in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for the duration of the World Health Organization (WHO) declaration of COVID-19 as a global pandemic.

                History
                : 10 March 2022
                Funding
                Funded by: FundRef http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100000155, Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada;
                Award ID: 950-232347
                Award Recipient :
                Categories
                Review Article

                Family & Child studies
                intimate partner violence,covid-19,coronavirus,mental health,family violence

                Comments

                Comment on this article