Cargando…
Optimizing the Construction of Outcome Measures for Impact Evaluations of Intimate Partner Violence Prevention Interventions
Most impact evaluations of intimate partner violence (IPV) prevention interventions use binary measures of “any” versus “no” physical and/or sexual IPV as their primary outcome measure, missing opportunities to capture nuance. In this study, we reanalyzed secondary data from six randomized controlle...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
SAGE Publications
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10668532/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37032608 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/08862605231162887 |
_version_ | 1785149150486069248 |
---|---|
author | Chatterji, Sangeeta Boyer, Christopher Sharma, Vandana Abramsky, Tanya Levtov, Ruti Doyle, Kate Harvey, Sheila Heise, Lori |
author_facet | Chatterji, Sangeeta Boyer, Christopher Sharma, Vandana Abramsky, Tanya Levtov, Ruti Doyle, Kate Harvey, Sheila Heise, Lori |
author_sort | Chatterji, Sangeeta |
collection | PubMed |
description | Most impact evaluations of intimate partner violence (IPV) prevention interventions use binary measures of “any” versus “no” physical and/or sexual IPV as their primary outcome measure, missing opportunities to capture nuance. In this study, we reanalyzed secondary data from six randomized controlled trials conducted in low- and middle-income countries—Bandebereho (Rwanda), Becoming One (Uganda), Indashyikirwa (Rwanda), MAISHA CRT01, MAISHA CRT02 (Tanzania), Stepping Stones Creating Futures (South Africa), and Unite for a Better Life (Ethiopia), to assess how different conceptualizations and coding of IPV variables can influence interpretations of the impact of an intervention. We compared the standard outcome measures to new measures that reflect the severity and intensity of violence and whether interventions prevent new cases of IPV or reduce or stop ongoing violence. Results indicate that traditional binary indicators masked some of the more subtle intervention effects, and the use of the new indicators allowed for a better understanding of the impacts of the interventions. Conclusions on whether a program is perceived “to work” are highly influenced by the IPV outcomes that the investigators choose to report, and how they are measured and coded. Lack of attention to outcome choice and measurement could lead to prematurely abandoning strategies useful for violence reduction or missing essential insights into how programs may or may not affect IPV. While these results must be interpreted cautiously, given differences in intervention types, the underlying prevalence of violence, sociodemographic factors, sample sizes, and other contextual differences across the trial sites, they can help us move toward a new approach to reporting multiple outcomes that allow us to unpack the “impact” of an intervention by assessing intervention effect by the severity of violence and type of prevention, whether primary and secondary. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10668532 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | SAGE Publications |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-106685322023-11-24 Optimizing the Construction of Outcome Measures for Impact Evaluations of Intimate Partner Violence Prevention Interventions Chatterji, Sangeeta Boyer, Christopher Sharma, Vandana Abramsky, Tanya Levtov, Ruti Doyle, Kate Harvey, Sheila Heise, Lori J Interpers Violence Original Articles Most impact evaluations of intimate partner violence (IPV) prevention interventions use binary measures of “any” versus “no” physical and/or sexual IPV as their primary outcome measure, missing opportunities to capture nuance. In this study, we reanalyzed secondary data from six randomized controlled trials conducted in low- and middle-income countries—Bandebereho (Rwanda), Becoming One (Uganda), Indashyikirwa (Rwanda), MAISHA CRT01, MAISHA CRT02 (Tanzania), Stepping Stones Creating Futures (South Africa), and Unite for a Better Life (Ethiopia), to assess how different conceptualizations and coding of IPV variables can influence interpretations of the impact of an intervention. We compared the standard outcome measures to new measures that reflect the severity and intensity of violence and whether interventions prevent new cases of IPV or reduce or stop ongoing violence. Results indicate that traditional binary indicators masked some of the more subtle intervention effects, and the use of the new indicators allowed for a better understanding of the impacts of the interventions. Conclusions on whether a program is perceived “to work” are highly influenced by the IPV outcomes that the investigators choose to report, and how they are measured and coded. Lack of attention to outcome choice and measurement could lead to prematurely abandoning strategies useful for violence reduction or missing essential insights into how programs may or may not affect IPV. While these results must be interpreted cautiously, given differences in intervention types, the underlying prevalence of violence, sociodemographic factors, sample sizes, and other contextual differences across the trial sites, they can help us move toward a new approach to reporting multiple outcomes that allow us to unpack the “impact” of an intervention by assessing intervention effect by the severity of violence and type of prevention, whether primary and secondary. SAGE Publications 2023-04-09 /pmc/articles/PMC10668532/ /pubmed/37032608 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/08862605231162887 Text en © The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) which permits any use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access page (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage). |
spellingShingle | Original Articles Chatterji, Sangeeta Boyer, Christopher Sharma, Vandana Abramsky, Tanya Levtov, Ruti Doyle, Kate Harvey, Sheila Heise, Lori Optimizing the Construction of Outcome Measures for Impact Evaluations of Intimate Partner Violence Prevention Interventions |
title | Optimizing the Construction of Outcome Measures for Impact Evaluations of Intimate Partner Violence Prevention Interventions |
title_full | Optimizing the Construction of Outcome Measures for Impact Evaluations of Intimate Partner Violence Prevention Interventions |
title_fullStr | Optimizing the Construction of Outcome Measures for Impact Evaluations of Intimate Partner Violence Prevention Interventions |
title_full_unstemmed | Optimizing the Construction of Outcome Measures for Impact Evaluations of Intimate Partner Violence Prevention Interventions |
title_short | Optimizing the Construction of Outcome Measures for Impact Evaluations of Intimate Partner Violence Prevention Interventions |
title_sort | optimizing the construction of outcome measures for impact evaluations of intimate partner violence prevention interventions |
topic | Original Articles |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10668532/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37032608 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/08862605231162887 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT chatterjisangeeta optimizingtheconstructionofoutcomemeasuresforimpactevaluationsofintimatepartnerviolencepreventioninterventions AT boyerchristopher optimizingtheconstructionofoutcomemeasuresforimpactevaluationsofintimatepartnerviolencepreventioninterventions AT sharmavandana optimizingtheconstructionofoutcomemeasuresforimpactevaluationsofintimatepartnerviolencepreventioninterventions AT abramskytanya optimizingtheconstructionofoutcomemeasuresforimpactevaluationsofintimatepartnerviolencepreventioninterventions AT levtovruti optimizingtheconstructionofoutcomemeasuresforimpactevaluationsofintimatepartnerviolencepreventioninterventions AT doylekate optimizingtheconstructionofoutcomemeasuresforimpactevaluationsofintimatepartnerviolencepreventioninterventions AT harveysheila optimizingtheconstructionofoutcomemeasuresforimpactevaluationsofintimatepartnerviolencepreventioninterventions AT heiselori optimizingtheconstructionofoutcomemeasuresforimpactevaluationsofintimatepartnerviolencepreventioninterventions |