Cited by 141Intimate Partner and Family ViolenceElder Abuse and NeglectChild Abuse and Trauma

Intimate Partner Violence Among Men

Reid, Robert J., Bonomi, Amy E., Rivara, Frederick P., Anderson, Melissa L., Fishman, Paul A., Carrell, David S., Thompson, Robert S.·2008·American Journal of Preventive Medicine

Abstract

Context The breadth and depth of intimate partner violence (IPV) experienced by men have not been fully documented.Objectives To describe the prevalence, chronicity, and severity of IPV, and the health outcomes associated with IPV, in adult men with healthcare insurance.Design A retrospective telephone cohort study conducted from 2003 to 2005. The setting was an integrated healthcare system in Washington State and Idaho.Participants English-speaking men aged 18 and older (N=420) enrolled in the healthcare system for 3 or more years.Main outcome measures Physical, psychological, and sexual IPV were assessed using five questions from the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance Survey. Health was measured using the Short Form-36, version 2 (SF-36v2) survey, the Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression Scale, and the National Institute of Mental Health Presence of Symptoms Survey.Results Men experienced IPV at a rate of 4.6% in the past year, 10.4% in the past 5 years, and 28.8% over their lifetimes. While overall rates of physical and nonphysical IPV were similar, men aged 18-55 were twice as likely to be recently abused (14.2%, SE=2.6%) than were men aged 55 and older (5.3%, SE=1.6%). Abuse was typically nonviolent or mildly violent, occurred on multiple occasions, and was initiated by only one intimate partner. Compared to men with no IPV, older men who experienced IPV had more depressive symptoms (prevalence ratios=2.61 and 2.80 for nonphysical and physical abuse) and had lower SF-36v2 mental health subscales (range=-3.21 to -5.86).Conclusions Men experience IPV at moderate rates, and poor mental health outcomes are associated with such experiences.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.amepre.2008.01.029

Cites

39 of 39 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Reid, R. J., Bonomi, A. E., Rivara, F. P., Anderson, M. L., Fishman, P. A., Carrell, D. S., & Thompson, R. S.
Affiliations
  • Group Health Cooperative (US)
  • University of Washington (US)
Venue
American Journal of Preventive Medicine
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2008-06
Volume
34
Issue
6
Pages
478-485
ISSN
0749-3797 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1977372889
Cited by
141
References
39
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 12 · 2014: 13 · 2013: 12 · 2012: 14
FWCI
3.52
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • American Journal of Preventive Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (R01 HS10909)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Health › Intimate Partner and Family Violence
  • Social Sciences › Demography › Elder Abuse and Neglect
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Child Abuse and Trauma
Keywords
intimate partner violence, men, physical abuse, psychological violence, sexual abuse, prevalence, chronicity, severity, depressive symptoms, mental health, health outcomes, older men, health insurance
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Health Status, Humans, Male, Mental Health, Middle Aged, Retrospective Studies, Socioeconomic Factors, Spouse Abuse, Prevalence, Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, Men's Health

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review