A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Intimate Partner Violence Risk Factors: A Vulnerability-Adaptation Stress Model Approach. | LitMetric

Intimate partner violence (IPV) disproportionally affects women. Using the vulnerability-adaptation stress model, we examined adverse childhood experiences (ACEs), self-esteem, and hope as vulnerability indicators and relationship status and length, positive and negative affect, and socioeconomic status (SES) as stressors to ascertain the risk for IPV. Women ( = 491, = 37.15, standard deviation = 12.51) completed an online survey comprised of the Positive and Negative Affect Scale, Rosenberg's Self-esteem Scale, Snyder's Hope Scale, ACE questionnaire, Composite Abuse Scale Revised-Short Form, and demographic questions. Factor analysis identified four ACE factors of sexual abuse, physical or psychological abuse, witnessing domestic violence, and household dysfunction. A five-step hierarchical multiple regression identified that greater exposure to physical or psychological child abuse was associated with an increased risk of IPV (Step 2), = 0.73 [0.16, 1.34]. Lower self-esteem, = -0.30 [-0.47, -0.14] predicted IPV (Step 3). Age = 0.07 [0.01, 0.13], negative affect, = 0.39 [0.19, 0.59], and relationship length, = -1.24 [-2.16, 0.41] were associated with a higher risk of IPV (Step 4). In Step 5, previous variables attenuated to non-significance while age, = 0.07 [0.01, 0.13], negative affect, = 0.39 [0.19, 0.59], and relationship length = -1.25 [-2.16, 0.41] remained significant. While the key findings of this study were inconsistent with some commonly reported findings (e.g., ACEs, self-esteem, hope, relationship status, SES, age), these inconsistencies are important to highlight given the factorial approach to examining ACEs, the comprehensive analyses conducted, and our examination of these variables' direct relationship to IPV. The study was limited by its cross-sectional nature, higher prevalence of IPV victims, and not examining IPV sub-types. Similar studies need to be conducted for other relationship types and victimized individuals (e.g., same-sex relationships and male victims) to provide a complete picture of risk factors for IPV.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11283747PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/08862605241234352DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

negative affect
16
risk ipv
12
ipv step
12
ipv
9
intimate partner
8
partner violence
8
risk factors
8
vulnerability-adaptation stress
8
stress model
8
aces self-esteem
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!