Published in PLOS One on 2026-07-30, 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: Enyew Getaneh Mekonen
Source: PLOS One • DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0353669
Read the complete primary study ↗ · Creative Commons Attribution licence
From the researchers
Abstract
Intimate partner violence is a major public health and human rights issue, affecting one in four women globally. It is particularly prevalent in low‑ and middle‑income countries, where reproductive‑age women face heightened risks due to cultural norms, poverty, and weak legal protections. It is linked to severe mental, physical, and reproductive health consequences, as well as intergenerational and societal impacts. Using recent demographic and health survey data, this study provides updated cross‑regional insights into intimate partner violence among women in Africa and Asia to inform culturally tailored interventions and strengthen policy frameworks.
A cross-sectional study was conducted using recent demographic and health survey data (2022–2024) from twelve countries in sub-Saharan Africa and Asia, including 88,414 women aged 15–49 years. Intimate partner violence was measured using 13 self‑reported items adapted from the Conflict Tactics Scale and coded as a binary outcome. Explanatory variables were selected based on the WHO ecological model, covering individual, relationship, community, and societal factors. Weighted data were analyzed in STATA 17 using multilevel logistic regression to account for clustering, with associations reported as adjusted odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals.
The overall prevalence of intimate partner violence among reproductive‑age women in sub-Saharan Africa and Asia was 29.51% (95% CI: 29.21–29.81), with emotional (21.03%) being most common. Prevalence ranged from 51.74% in the Democratic Republic of Congo to 13.53% in the Philippines. Multilevel analysis identified significant predictors, including age, education, marital and employment status, early cohabitation, number of children, maternal abuse exposure, attitudes toward wife‑beating, partner jealousy, fear of partner, smoking, partner alcohol use, and region. Notably, partner alcohol consumption (AOR = 3.10), fear of partner (AOR = 2.98), and partner jealousy (AOR = 2.96) showed the strongest associations with intimate partner violence.
Nearly one in three reproductive‑age women experienced intimate partner violence, highlighting its magnitude and public health importance. Intimate partner violence was strongly associated with socio‑demographic, behavioral, and attitudinal factors and regional differences. These findings call for multi‑level interventions that promote women’s empowerment, challenge harmful gender norms, strengthen legal frameworks, and expand community‑based support, while future longitudinal and qualitative research should deepen understanding and guide evidence‑based policy.
Background
Intimate partner violence (IPV), defined as physical or sexual violence perpetrated against women by a current or former partner [1], is a major public health and human rights issue recognized by the World Health Organization (WHO) and United Nations (UN) [2,3]. One in four women worldwide are affected, making IPV the most prevalent form of violence against women and a key barrier to achieving the 2030 Sustainable Development Goals, particularly Target 5.2 on eliminating violence against women and girls [4–6].
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 public health 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 Enyew Getaneh Mekonen. 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: Anemia among HIV‑positive women in LMICs: Multilevel analysis of recent DHS survey
- Evidence brief: Antenatal intimate partner violence and breastfeeding practices: Evidence from a national longitudinal study in Ethiopia
- Evidence brief: Individual, community, and societal drivers of adolescent peer violence in Asella, Ethiopia: A school-based cross-sectional study utilizing the socio-ecological model
