Menu
Menu
Menu
Menu
Background: Violence against women is a common form of human rights violation, and intimate partner violence (IPV) appears to be the most significant component of violence. The aim of this study was to examine the association between women decision-making capacity and IPV among Women in Sub-Saharan Africa. The study also looked at how socio-demographic factors also influence IPV among Women in Sub-Saharan Africa. Methods: The study made use of pooled data from most recent Demographic and Health Survey (DHS) conducted from January 1, 2010, and December 3, 2016, in 18 countries in Sub-Saharan Africa. For the purpose of the study, only women aged 15-49 were used (N = 84,486). Univariate and multivariate logistic regression models were used to investigate the relationship between the explanatory variables and the outcome variable. Results: The odds of reporting ever experienced IPV was higher among women with decision-making capacity [AOR = 1.35; CI = 1.35-1.48]. The likelihood of experiencing IPV was low among young women. Women who belong to other religious groups and Christians were more likely to experience IPV compared to those who were Muslims [AOR = 1.73; CI = 1.65-1.82] and [AOR = 1.87; CI = 1.72-2.02] respectively. Women who have partners with no education [AOR = 1.11; CI = 1.03-1.20], those whose partners had primary education [AOR = 1.34; CI = 1.25-1.44] and those whose partners had secondary education [AOR = 1.22; CI = 1.15-1.30] were more likely to IPV compared to those whose partners had higher education. The odds of experiencing IPV were high among women who were employed compared to those who were unemployed [AOR = 1.33; CI = 1.28-1.37]. The likelihood of the occurrence of IPV was also high among women who were cohabiting compared to those who were married [AOR = 1.16; CI = 1.10-1.21]. Women with no education [AOR = 1.37; CI = 1.24-1.51], those with primary education [AOR = 1.65; CI = 1.50-1.82] and those with secondary education [AOR = 1.50; CI = 1.37-1.64] were more likely to experience IPV compared to those with higher education. Finally, women with poorest wealth status [AOR = 1.28; CI = 1.20-1.37], those with poorer wealth status [AOR = 1.24; CI = 1.17-1.32], those with middle wealth status [AOR = 1.27; CI = 1.20-1.34] and those with richer wealth status [AOR = 1.11; CI = 1.06-1.17] were more likely to IPV compared to women with richest wealth status. Conclusion: Though related socio-demographic characteristics and women decision-making capacity provided an explanation of IPV among women in sub-Saharan Africa, there were differences in relation to how each socio-demographic variable predisposed women to IPV in Sub-Saharan Africa.
The study made use of pooled data from most current Demographic and Health Survey (DHS) conducted from January 1, 2010, and December 31, 2016, conducted in 18 countries in Sub-Saharan Africa. DHS is a nationwide survey collected every five-year period across low and middle-income countries. DHS focuses on maternal and child health by interviewing women of reproductive age (15–49 years). DHS surveys follow the same standard procedures – sampling, questionnaires, data collection, cleaning, coding and analysis which allows for cross-country comparison. The survey employs a stratified two-stage sampling technique. The first stage involved the selecting of points or clusters (enumeration areas [EAs]). The second stage is the systematic sampling of households listed in each cluster or EA. All women in their reproductive age (15–49) who were usual of selected households or visitors who slept in the household on the night before the survey were interviewed. The response rate varied from 86.2% to 100.0% For the purpose of this, only women who had information on reproduction health decision-making were used (N = 84,486). Women gave oral and written consent. Ethical approval was given by individual national institutions review board and by ICF International institutional review board. Permission to use the data set was sort from MEASURE DHS. Data set is available to the public at www.measuredhs.org. The outcome variable employed for this study was intimate partner violence. The outcome variable was derived from three questions “experienced any sexual violence?”, “experienced any emotional violence?” and “experienced and physical violence?”. The response categories of these variables were: “Yes” and “No”. The ‘Yes’ responses were coded ‘1’ and the ‘No’ responses were coded ‘0’. An index was created with all the “Yes” and “No” answers with scores ranging from 0 to 3. The score 0 was labelled as “No” and 1 to 3 was labelled as “Yes”. A dummy variable was generated with ‘0’ score being females who had not experienced any form of sexual or emotional or physical violence and ‘1’ if females had experienced either sexual or emotional or physical violence. The main explanatory variable, decision-making capacity, was derived from three questions “decision on personal health care”, “decision on large household purchase” and “decision on visits to family or relatives”. These response categories were recoded as “not alone = 0” and “alone = 1”). An index was created with all the “yes” and “no” answers with scores ranging from 0 to 3. The score 0 and 1 were labelled as “no capacity” and 2 and 3 were labelled as “capacity”. A dummy variable was generated with ‘0′ score being females who did not have the capacity and ‘1′ if females who had the capacity. The other explanatory variables consisted of: residence, age, wealth status, education, religion, occupation, marital status, partner’s education and country. Residence was categorized as urban and rural. Age was grouped in 5 – year interval: 15–19, 20–24, 25–29, 30–34, 35–39, 40–44, 45–49. Wealth status was derived from the ownership of a variety of household assets and categorized as poorest, poorer, middle, richer and richest. Level of education and partner’s education was captured as no education, primary, secondary and higher education. Religion was recoded as Christian, Muslims and Others. Religion was not available for Niger. Occupation was categorized as not working, working outside the home and working at home. Marital status was captured as married and cohabitation. Descriptive and inferential statistics were conducted. Descriptive figures are reposted in percentages by countries. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression models used to investigate the relationship between the explanatory variables and the outcome variable. Two models were used to access the predictors of intimate partner violence. Model I looked at a bivariate analysis of the main independent variable, thus, decision-making capacity and the outcome variable. Model II looked at a bivariate analysis between decision-making capacity and the outcome variable and controlled for age and country. Model III adjusted for age and country by including them in the model together with all the other independent variables. This was done to find the association between all the independent variables, including age and country and the outcome variable. All frequency distributions were weighted whiles the survey command in Stata was used to adjust for the complex sampling structure of the data in the regression analyses. All results of the logistic analyses were presented as odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).
N/A
