Published in PLOS One on 2026-04-21, this study is presented as an attributed evidence briefing. The excerpts below are the original researchers’ words, reproduced under their Creative Commons Attribution licence. Health Signal has selected the abstract and, where needed, opening background paragraphs; the complete methods, results, limitations and references remain in the linked paper.
Original authors: Tilahun Belete Mossie, Haile Mekonnen Fenta, Meseret Tadesse, Animut Tadele
Source: PLOS One • DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0331422
Read the complete primary study ↗ · Creative Commons Attribution licence
From the researchers
Abstract
Even if the effects of alcohol use on Intimate Partner Violence (IPV) are well documented, most of the research were from developed countries. Sub Saharan Africa is famous for higher rates of IPV, yet its relationship with partners alcohol consumption is rarely studied. This project focused on assessing the relationship between partners alcohol consumption and IPV against married women, using dual dataset for men and women.
We used the recent 2021–2022 Demographic and Health Survey (DHS) dataset for five countries in Sub Saharan Africa. We accessed the dataset on February 13, 2024. The data was anonymous, and there was no any personal identifier. The dataset included 37,465 participants. We used women questionnaire to determine IPV and related factors, and partner’s questionnaire for alcohol and related factors. STATA 18 was used for analysis. A generalized linear mixed model (GLMM) used to estimate the effect of partner alcohol consumption and other factors on IPV. We determined the level of significance at p-value of less than.05.
The prevalence of IPV was 33.6% [32.9–34.2%]; and that of partner alcohol consumption accounted 25% [24.5–25.4%]. Partner alcohol consumption increased the odds of physical, emotional, sexual, and any form of IPV.
Partner alcohol consumption increased the odds of IPV, which suggests that partner inclusive intervention packages might be effective in addressing IPV against women in SSA.
Background
Abuse or harm to a person who is in an intimate relationship, married or cohabiting, that may take the form of physical, emotional, sexual, or other types of violence is termed as Intimate Partner Violence (IPV). IPV can take different forms. Pushing, slapping, twisting, pulling, punching, kicking, beating, burning, and threatening or attacking with a sharp material or a firearm is considered as physical form of IPV. Emotional type of IPV includes verbal threats, humiliation in front of others, or insults. Forced, threatened or similar acts for sexual intercourse without partner’s willing is sexual type of IPV [1,2].
Violence has gained global attention. Ending all forms of violence against women is an agenda in the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals. The United Nations Women office reported that about 245 million girls and women experience IPV every year. Each occurrence of IPV may have a significant and enduring effect on the survivors’ lives, their families, children, communities as well as society. The worldwide cost of violence against women is tremendous – assessed to be a minimum of USD 1.5 trillion or roughly 2 percent of global Gross Domestic Product (GDP) [2].
Intimate Partner Violence (IPV) against women has been more common in Sub Saharan Africa (SSA). Prior reports showed that despite integrated interventions against IPV, there has been a lack of marked decrements in its prevalence in the region [3–6]. In our previous article, we indicated a disparity in terms of the magnitude and the type of IPV against women across the region. The paper also indicated great discrepancies across catchment areas in a certain country in the experience of IPV [7]. Identifying the factors associated with IPV may be important to address the target groups. Among the different types of violence, physical violence, emotional violence, and sexual violence have been studied at different times. There have been numerous factors significantly associated with IPV. Sociology-demographic and spouse related issues are commonly described factors that showed significant association [3–6].
Reading this evidence
Use the full paper to check the study design, participant selection, comparator and outcome definitions before drawing a practical conclusion. An association does not by itself show cause and effect. A reported performance measure needs its denominator and uncertainty. A finding from a particular facility, sample or time period should retain that scope when it is discussed elsewhere.
This briefing makes the source accessible within the wider research & evidence desk. It does not assess an individual patient or certify a product. When considering relevance to another health system, examine the original authors’ account of context and limitations, then seek local implementation evidence. The related reporting below provides other studies to read alongside this one; it is a topic connection, rather than a claim that their results are directly comparable.
© 2026 Tilahun Belete Mossie, Haile Mekonnen Fenta, Meseret Tadesse, Animut Tadele. Excerpts reproduced under CC BY. Selection, formatting and contextual notes by Health Signal. The researchers are the authors of the source study, not members of Health Signal’s staff.
Explore connected evidence
- Evidence brief: Prevalence and associated factors of intimate partner violence against reproductive-age women in Africa and Asia regions: Insights from 2022–2024 DHS datasets
- Evidence brief: Antenatal intimate partner violence and breastfeeding practices: Evidence from a national longitudinal study in Ethiopia
- Evidence brief: Intimate partner violence and unmet need for family planning in the Democratic Republic of the Congo: A secondary analysis of the moderating role of reproductive coercion using performance monitoring for action data
