Compelling, credible, recent, direct impact data
Time to read
less than
1 minute
Read so far

Psychological and/or Social interventions - Lower Chance of IPV

0 comments

Strategy researched

Psychological and/or social interventions (not simply provision of material resources) in individual and group format, sexual and/or health education and counselling, and educational discussion groups, as well as community mobilisation interventions and comprehensive community resource provision that included psychosocial support

Impact achieved

For all RCTs/intimate partner violence (IPV) outcomes combined, interventions performed significantly better than controls at shortest (relative risk (RR) = 0.76, 95% CI = 0.63-0.92, P = 0.004, I2 = 84, 95% CI = 76-91) and longest (RR = 0.73, 95% CI = 0.56-0.89, P = 0.000, I2 = 79, 95% CI = 66-88) follow-up, representing a 24% and 27% lower chance of IPV, respectively.

Country of study

LMICs

Research methodology

Meta-analysis of 13 RCTs

Journal

Journal of Global Health; 2020

Journal paper title and link

Psychosocial interventions for intimate partner violence in low and middle income countries: A meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

Excerpt from Abstract

"Psychosocial interventions reduced any form of IPV by 27% at shortest (relative risk (RR)= 0.73) and 25% at longest (RR= 0.75) follow up. Physical IPV was reduced by 22% at shortest (RR= 0.78) and 27% at longest (RR= 0.73) follow up. Sexual IPV was reduced by 23% at longest follow up (RR= 0.77) but showed no significant effect at shortest follow-up."

 

Add new comment

Your Priorities, Opportunities and Challenges? Complete the SURVEY

Why the focus on direct impact data?

A common challenge from policy makers, funders, community members, people directly experiencing development issues, and governments is: Demonstrate your Impact. Prove that what you are doing works. The high quality, highly credible data presented on the cards below is designed to help you answer that question for your social change, behaviour change, community engagement, communication and media for development, strategy formulation, policy engagement and funding initiatives. At this link filter the research data to your specific interests and priorities

Why a playing cards design?

There is a physical pack of cards with this data (to get a copy please request through the comment form for any card). The card approach allows for easy identification and selection of relevant direct impact data in any context. For example if talking with a donor and you need to identify proof of impact say "take a look at the 7 of Hearts". Quick access can be provided to high-quality data for many areas of your work – funding, planning, policy, advocacy, community dialogue, training, partner engagement, and more. A card deck is also engaging, easy to use and share, a conversation starter, and a resource - and they are fun and different. So we kept that design for the online images as it can serve similar purposes. 

What are the criteria for inclusion?

The impact data presented meets the following high standard for inclusion criteria:

  • Positive change or trend in a priority development issue;
  • Social change or behaviour change strategy or process;
  • Randomized Control Trial or Systematic Review methodology;
  • High quality peer review journal published;
  • Numeric impact data point
  • Published since 2010.