Cited by 619Intimate Partner and Family ViolenceGender, Violence, Rights in Latin AmericaSexual Assault and Victimization Studies

Researching Domestic Violence Against Women: Methodological and Ethical Considerations

Ellsberg, Mary, Heise, Lori, Peña, Rodolfo, Agurto, Sonia, Winkvist, Anna·2001·Studies in Family Planning

Abstract

The results of three population‐based studies on violence against women in Nicaragua are compared in this article. Two of the studies were regional in scope (Leon and Managua) and focused specifically on women's experiences of violence, whereas the third study was a Demographic and Health Survey (DHS) conducted with a nationally representative sample of women. The lifetime prevalence estimates for women's undergoing physical violence from a partner were significantly higher in the Leon study (52 percent) and Managua study (69 percent), compared with that given in the DHS (28 percent). Possible explanations for the differences are examined through pooled multivariate logistic regression analysis, as well as analysis ofsix focus‐group discussions cairied out with field‐workers and staff from the three studies. The most important differences that were found concerned ethical and safety procedures and the interview setting. The results indicate that prevalence estimates for violence are highly sensitive to methodological factors, and that underreporting is a significant threat to validity.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1728-4465.2001.00001.x

Cites

42 of 42 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
Ellsberg, M., Heise, L., Peña, R., Agurto, S., & Winkvist, A.
Affiliations
  • Umeå University (SE)
  • Program for Appropriate Technology in Health (US)
  • Universidad de León (ES)
Corresponding author
Ellsberg, Mary
Venue
Studies in Family Planning
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2001-03
Volume
32
Issue
1
Pages
1-16
ISSN
  • 0039-3665 (ISSN-L)
  • 1728-4465
OpenAlex
W1976346059
Cited by
619
References
42
Citations by year
2026: 16 · 2025: 24 · 2024: 17 · 2023: 29 · 2022: 36 · 2021: 41 · 2020: 41 · 2019: 25 · 2018: 28 · 2017: 27 · 2016: 29 · 2015: 27 · 2014: 34 · 2013: 30 · 2012: 31
FWCI
12.62
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Studies in Family Planning (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • LSHTM Research Online (London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Health › Intimate Partner and Family Violence
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Gender, Violence, Rights in Latin America
  • Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Sexual Assault and Victimization Studies
Keywords
domestic violence against women, physical intimate partner violence, lifetime prevalence, underreporting, survey methodology, research ethics, interview setting, Nicaragua, León, Managua, Demographic and Health Surveys
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Epidemiologic Methods, Ethics, Female, Health Surveys, Humans, Middle Aged, Nicaragua, Surveys and Questionnaires, Bias, Prevalence, Logistic Models, Women's Health, Focus Groups, Domestic Violence

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