Effectiveness of community mobilisation and group-based interventions for preventing intimate partner violence against women in low- and middle-income countries: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Abstract

Background: Intimate partner violence (IPV) is a challenge affecting one in three women in their lifetime, and gender-transformative interventions have been identified as a promising prevention strategy. We systematically reviewed and meta-analysed randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of community-level or group-based interventions to prevent IPV in lower- and middle-income countries, seeking to answer the following research question: do community- or group-based gender-transformative interventions reduce IPV, compared to a control arm of status-quo programming? Methods: We conducted a systematic search from the inception of all databases employed until 20 July 2021. Eligible study outcomes included past-year experience of physical, sexual, emotional or economic IPV self-reported by women and perpetration of physical or sexual IPV self-reported by men. We assessed study risk of bias using the updated Cochrane tool for RCTs. We estimated the pooled odds ratio (OR) using a multilevel random-effects meta-analysis and also conducted a multilevel meta-regression to analyse how study characteristics moderated the effect size. Results: = 83%), potentially reflecting the diverse contexts of the included trials, our meta-regression did not indicate a significant association between intervention effectiveness and intervention type or target population. There was evidence of significant associations between effectiveness and intervention components and duration. Discussion: There is strong evidence that community-level and group-based interventions reduce IPV against women. Unpacking what intervention modalities are effective in which contexts can further inform prevention strategies. Registration: PROSPERO (CRD42021290193).

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 32 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.