Vanesa García-Díaz1, Ana Fernández-Feito2, Carolina Bringas-Molleda3, Francisco Javier Rodríguez-Díaz4, Alberto Lana1. 1. Department of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of Oviedo/ISPA, Oviedo, Spain. 2. Department of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of Oviedo/ISPA, Oviedo, Spain. Electronic address: fernandezfana@uniovi.es. 3. Department of Psychology and Anthropology, Faculty of Teacher Formation, University of Extremadura, Cáceres, Spain. 4. Department of Psychology, Faculty of Psychology, University of Oviedo, Oviedo, Spain.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To explore university health science students' intimate partner violence tolerance and sexist attitudes and to examine their trend throughout the academic years. METHODS: Cross-sectional study of students of both sexes of the degrees of medicine, nursing, and psychology from three selected Spanish universities (n = 1,322). Data were collected anonymously using two validated scales: the Dating Violence Questionnaire (DVQ-R) and the Gender Role Attitudes Scale (GRAS). Logistic regressions were used to compare tolerance toward violence and sexist attitudes across the degrees. The evolution of these variables throughout different academic courses was assessed. RESULTS: Of the sample, 62.8% were tolerant towards intimate partner violence. The percentage of tolerant students was significantly higher in Psychology (75.9%) than in Nursing (57.7%) and Medicine Degrees (60.3%). A higher percentage of sexist students was also found in psychology students (80.8%) than in nursing (62.2%) and medicine students (62.7%). Compared to the first-year students, female medicine students of the last courses were less tolerant to intimate partner violence (p-trend <0.001), and male medicine students had less sexist attitudes (p-trend = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: Tolerance of intimate partner violence and sexist attitudes were very high, especially among psychology students. These indicators were significantly better among medicine students of higher courses, suggesting a positive effect of medical training. Intimate partner violence in the university education of the future health professionals should be addressed. .
OBJECTIVE: To explore university health science students' intimate partner violence tolerance and sexist attitudes and to examine their trend throughout the academic years. METHODS: Cross-sectional study of students of both sexes of the degrees of medicine, nursing, and psychology from three selected Spanish universities (n = 1,322). Data were collected anonymously using two validated scales: the Dating Violence Questionnaire (DVQ-R) and the Gender Role Attitudes Scale (GRAS). Logistic regressions were used to compare tolerance toward violence and sexist attitudes across the degrees. The evolution of these variables throughout different academic courses was assessed. RESULTS: Of the sample, 62.8% were tolerant towards intimate partner violence. The percentage of tolerant students was significantly higher in Psychology (75.9%) than in Nursing (57.7%) and Medicine Degrees (60.3%). A higher percentage of sexist students was also found in psychology students (80.8%) than in nursing (62.2%) and medicine students (62.7%). Compared to the first-year students, female medicine students of the last courses were less tolerant to intimate partner violence (p-trend <0.001), and male medicine students had less sexist attitudes (p-trend = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: Tolerance of intimate partner violence and sexist attitudes were very high, especially among psychology students. These indicators were significantly better among medicine students of higher courses, suggesting a positive effect of medical training. Intimate partner violence in the university education of the future health professionals should be addressed. .
Keywords:
Actitudes; Attitudes; Estudiantes de ocupaciones de la salud; Gender identity; Health occupations students; Identidad de género; Intimate partner violence; Sexism; Sexismo; Universidades; Universities; Violencia de pareja
Authors: Ana Belen Ortega-Avila; Pablo Cervera-Garvi; Ana Maria Jimenez-Cebrian; Esther Chicharro-Luna; Irene Garcia-Paya; Gabriel Gijon-Nogueron Journal: PeerJ Date: 2020-12-09 Impact factor: 2.984
Authors: Laura Serra; Laura Vall-Llosera; Diego Varga; Carme Saurina; Marc Saez; Gemma Renart Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2022-03-21 Impact factor: 3.295
Authors: Iria Dobarrio-Sanz; Anabel Fernández-Vargas; Alba Fernández-Férez; Diana Patricia Vanegas-Coveña; Otilia Vanessa Cordero-Ahiman; José Granero-Molina; Cayetano Fernández-Sola; José Manuel Hernández-Padilla Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2022-09-05 Impact factor: 4.614