Skip to main content

Table 4 Multivariate analysis comparing high dose receivers (more than 13+ sessions) of Men’s Discussion Group intervention versus age-matched controls, and low dose receivers (12 or fewer sessions) versus age-matched controls

From: Working with men to prevent intimate partner violence in a conflict-affected setting: a pilot cluster randomized controlled trial in rural Côte d’Ivoire

Trial outcomes (secondary outcomes in italics)

Low dose vs. control (N = 71 men in each group, and 46 most recent female partners in each group)

High dose vs. control (N = 86 men in each group, and 67 most recent female partners in each group)

 

Unadjusted RR¥(95% CI)

Adjusted RR¥(95% CI)

Unadjusted RR¥(95% CI)

Adjusted RR¥(95% CI)

Intimate Partner Violence (IPV) (Women’s reports)

 

Experience of physical and/or sexual IPV, last 12 months

0.64 (0.22 – 1.89)

0.59* (0.18 – 1.90)

0.76 (0.38 – 1.55)

0.68* (0.31 – 1.49)

Experience of physical IPV, last 12 months

1.11 (0.46 – 2.68)

0.60* (0.39 – 0.94)

1.31 (0.63 – 2.71)

0.90* (0.31 – 2.66)

Experience of sexual IPV, last 12 months

0.64 (0.22 – 1.89)

0.70* (0.18 – 2.76)

0.68 (0.25 – 1.85)

0.61* (0.22 – 1.68)

Intention and Attitudes towards IPV (Men’s reports)

 

Intention to use physical violence against an intimate partner (in at least one circumstance)

0.94 (0.80 – 1.11)

0.95*± (0.71 – 1.27)

0.57 (0.31 – 1.05)

0.60*± (0.33 – 1.06)

Believes a woman can refuse sex in all circumstances

1.39 (0.89 – 2.19)

1.33* (0.86 – 2.07)

1.08 (0.68 – 1.72)

1.03* (0.62 – 1.71)

Hostility & Conflict Management Skills (Men’s report of skill, women’s reports of no threats)

 

Man uses at least one hostility/conflict management technique and none of his female partners report him threatening her during arguments, last 12 months

1.23 (1.01 – 1.49)

1.27*± (1.00 – 1.60)

1.27 (1.07 – 1.51)

1.31*± (1.04 – 1.64)

Male Involvement in Household (Men’s reports)

 

Man involved in at least two household tasks, last 12 months

3.72 (2.32 – 5.95)

2.03* (1.44 – 2.87)

2.98 (0.88 – 10.03)

2.04* (0.86 – 4.83)

  1. ¥Risk ratios calculated at the cluster-level using data from follow-up. Both crude and adjusted ratios were adjusted for village-pair and weighted according to the number of observations per village.
  2. *Adjusted risk ratios generated on the basis of expected number of events from a logistic regression model on individual data with independent variables including man’s age, cohabitation status, self-reported ability to read, above median level of exposure to war-related traumatic events, and baseline measure of outcome indicator (or most similar baseline indicator available).
  3. ±Attitudes towards a man’s use of physical IPV against his wife, used as most similar baseline measure in calculation of adjusted risk ratio.
Back to article page

BMC Public Health

ISSN: 1471-2458

Contact us