Intimate partner violence among service members and veterans: Differences by sex and rurality.
Year: 2020
Type: article
Abstract: = 18,755); fit a mixed-effects, multilevel generalized linear model to the data for IPV victimization; and linked the model to U.S. Census Bureau population count data. We generated predicted estimates of IPV for SMVs and civilians separately by sex in rural and urban areas. The direct IPV victimization prevalence rate for the entire BRFSS sample was 16.90%. Substantial variation in model-based IPV prevalence was observed across subgroups. Female SMVs (rural = 23.54%, 95% confidence interval [CI] [17.33, 30.02]; urban = 23.34%, 95% CI [17.48, 30.17]) had higher IPV victimization rates than female civilians (rural = 14.55%, 95% CI [13.06, 16.37]; urban = 14.50%, 95% CI [13.19, 16.34]), whereas male civilians (rural = 8.06%, 95% CI [7.19, 9.08]; urban = 8.02%, 95% CI [7.27, 9.02]) had higher IPV victimization rates than male SMVs (rural = 7.21%, 95% CI [6.03, 8.47]; urban = 7.17%, 95% CI [6.00, 8.41]). Programming for preventing and assisting in recovering from IPV exposure should target rural-dwelling female SMVs.
DOI: 10.1037/trm0000236
Institutions: University of Alabama, George Mason University
Language: English
Subfield: Health
Field: Social Sciences
Domain: Social Sciences
Open Access status: green
OpenAlex ID: W2996829682