| Literature DB >> 32467354 |
Julia Vaillant1, Estelle Koussoubé2, Danielle Roth3, Rachael Pierotti2, Mazeda Hossain4, Kathryn L Falb5.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The study objective was to understand the effectiveness of Engaging Men through Accountable Practice (EMAP), a group-based discussion series which sought to transform gender relations in communities, on intimate partner violence (IPV), gender inequitable attitudes and related outcomes.Entities:
Keywords: cluster randomized trial; prevention strategies; public health; randomised
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32467354 PMCID: PMC7259847 DOI: 10.1136/bmjgh-2019-002223
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMJ Glob Health ISSN: 2059-7908
EMAP men’s group weekly session topics
| Session title | Goals |
| 1. Introduction | Introduce EMAP; discuss goals and expectations for the group; think about the society we live in. |
| 2. Understanding gender | Explore what the lives of women would look like in a community where no violence, discrimination and disrespect against women and girls existed; explore how men and women are socialised to think and act. |
| 3. Gender roles in my home | Understand the different tasks that women, men, girls and boys are expected to do during a day; understand how to have respectful discussions with women in our lives. |
| 4. Stages of change | Understand and practise accountable discussions; commit to changes in the home; begin making a personal action plan for change. |
| 5. Violence and manhood | Understand how violence impacts ideas of manhood. |
| 6. Understanding power and rights | Understand the different types of power; understand how status and privilege operate in the community; explore the concept of rights. |
| 7. Understanding power in the home | Understand power in the home; analyse one’s own use of power; practise accountable discussions. |
| 8. Understanding violence against women and girls | Understand the different types and root causes of VAWG. |
| 9. Sexual violence | Understand what sexual assault and rape are; explore harmful beliefs and myths about sexual violence. |
| 10. Intimate partner violence (IPV) | Understand why IPV occurs; explore root causes of IPV; understand that IPV is selective. |
| 11. Taking responsibility | Recognise our thoughts, feelings and emotions; take responsibility for our emotions and actions. |
| 12. Consequences of violence | Understand the consequences of violence on individuals, families and communities; reflect on why talking about violence may be difficult. |
| 13. Supporting survivors of violence | Discuss victim blaming and how to support survivors of violence; understand what it means to be an ally to women and girls. |
| 14. Healthy relationships | Explore the characteristics of healthy versus unhealthy relationships; reflect on discussions with women. |
| 15. Being an ally in the community | Understand what it means to be an ally in the community; reflect on helpful behaviours; identify key actions for change. |
| 16. Reflections | Reflect on what we have learnt and the changes we have committed to over the group; identify ways to continue being accountable to women and girls. |
EMAP, Engaging Men through Accountable Practice; VAWG, violence against women and girls.
Figure 1EMAP trial profile.
Description of variables
| Variable (report) | Construction | Hypothesis | Source |
| Any intimate partner violence (women) | Binary variable coded to 1 if a female partner of a male participant responded affirmatively to an instance of physical, sexual and/or emotional violence in the past 12 months (items detailed below). | Decrease | WHO multicountry study |
| Physical violence (women) | Binary variable coded to 1 if a female partner of a male participant responded affirmatively to an instance of any of the following items occurring in the past 12 months: (1) partner pushed, shook or threw something at respondent, (2) slapped her, (3) twisted respondent's arm or pulled her hair, (4) punched respondent with his fist or with something that could hurt her, (5) kicked respondent, dragged her on the floor, beat her, (6) tried to choke respondent or burn her on purpose, (7) threatened or attacked respondent with a knife, gun or other weapon. Coded to 0 if no occurrence, coded to missing if one item missing and all others are 0, coded to 1 if one item missing and at least one item is 1. | Decrease | WHO multicountry study |
| Severe physical violence (women) | Binary variable based on the same items as physical violence. It is coded to 1 if any of the items (3) to (7) listed above occurred or if item (1) or (2) happened more than once in the past 12 months. | Decrease | WHO multicountry study |
| Sexual violence (women) | Binary variable coded to 1 if a female partner of a male participant responded affirmatively to an instance of any of the following items occurring in the past 12 months: (1) partner physically forced respondent to have sex with him even when she did not want to, (2) forced respondent to have sex even when she did not want to because she was afraid of what he could do to her, (3) forced respondent to do sexual acts respondent finds humiliating. Treatment of missing values as above. | Decrease | WHO multicountry study |
| Emotional violence (women) | Binary variable coded to 1 if a woman reported at least one experience of emotional violence or controlling behaviour by her intimate partner in the past 12 months, defined as any of the following items occurring: (1) partner was jealous when respondent talked to other men, (2) accused respondent of cheating on him, (3) did not allow respondent to visit her friends, (4) attempted to limit respondent's contacts with her family, (5) insisted to know where respondent was at all times, (6) said or did something to humiliate respondent in front of others, (7) threatened to hurt or harm respondent or someone close to her, (8) insulted or made respondent feel bad about herself, (9) let respondent know he could have other partners. Treatment of missing values as above. | Decrease | WHO multicountry study |
| Economic abuse (women) | Binary variable coded to 1 if a woman reported at least one instance of economic abuse by her intimate partner in the past 12 months, defined as any of the following items: (1) took respondent's earned money against her will, (2) refused to give respondent money for household needs, even when he had money to do so, (3) forced respondent to give money earned by respondent to his own family. | Decrease | WHO multicountry study |
| Intention to commit violence (men) | This indicator is assessed using men’s responses using a Proximal Antecedents to Violent Episodes scale which comprised 18 items on a 4-point Likert scale of likelihood of becoming violent or intimidating. The variable is a continuous variable that is the sum of situations in which men reported being completely or somewhat likely to use violence: (1) if partner offends him, (2) threatens to leave him, (3) does not stop complaining, (4) if he walks in on partner having sexual intercourse, (5) if partner told him she would prefer never to have met him, (6) spends a lot of time with a close friend, (7) if he walks in on partner flirting with someone, (8) partner comes home late, (9) spends money without talking about it first, (10) they argue about sex, (11) if partner mocks him, (12) tries to control him, (13) interrupts him, (14) takes an important decision without telling him first, (15) ignores him, (16) is aggressive in the first place, (17) tries to leave him, (18) blames him for something he did not do; and of situations in which men reported being likely to become intimidating: (1) if partner does something to offend him, (2) threatens to leave him, (3) spends a lot of time with a close friend, (4) walks in on partner flirting with someone, (5) comes home late, (6) spends money without discussing it first, (7) they argue about sex, (8) partner mocks him, (9) interrupts him, (10) takes an important decision without telling him. Range: 0–28. | Decrease | Proximal Antecedents to Violence Episodes scale |
| Acceptance of physical violence (men) | Binary variable equal to 1 if the male participant agrees with any of the following reasons as a justification for a husband to beat or hit his wife: if she goes out without telling him, if she neglects the children, if she refuses to have sex with him, if she burns the food, if she disobeys, if he knows that she has been unfaithful. Variable is coded to 0 if he disagrees with all the reasons. | Decrease | WHO multicountry study |
| Ability to refuse sex (men) | Binary variable equal to 1 if the male participant agrees with all the following reasons as a justification for a woman to refuse sex with her husband: if she finds out he has an STI, if she finds out he is having sex with another woman, if she just gave birth, if she is tired or not in the mood, if he is drunk, if he mistreats her, if he refuses to use condoms. Variable is coded to 0 if he agrees with at least one of the reasons. | Increase | WHO multicountry study |
| Gender equitable attitudes (men) | Continuous variable that is the sum of the answers to a list of 16 statements about gender beliefs and behaviours such as: ‘A woman should be ashamed if her husband had to cook or clean the house’, ‘women's behaviors are the cause of the violence used against them by their partners’, ‘a woman could be a good local leader’. Items are reversed if needed to indicate gender equitable attitudes when equal to 1. | Increase | Adapted from various items from the Compendium of Gender Scales (Gender Equitable Men and Gender Beliefs) |
| Quality of the relationship (women) | Sum of responses to the following seven items on a Likert frequency scale: feels appreciated by partner, feels partner and her manage to sort out their disagreement, feels partner belittled her opinions (reversed), feelings or desires, feels partner blames her when something is wrong (reversed), feels partner and her share their happy and sad moments, her partner and her live in harmony, participate together in activities outside of the house. Range: 0–14, higher values indicate increased quality of the relationship. | Increase | The scale was designed for this study based on formative research conducted by IRC during preparation of the intervention. |
| Perception of negative male behaviour (women) | Sum of responses to the following five items on a Likert frequency scale: feels partner drinks too much, spends household money on for personal leisure, returns home too late, spends too much time with other women, is rude to her. Range: 0–10, higher values indicate increased perceived negative behaviours by the par quality of the relationship. | Decrease | Same as above |
| Respondent lets partner know the totality of her income (women/men) | Women and men were asked whether their partner knows about the totality, more than half, less than half, or does not know anything at all about the income that they earn personally. Outcome variable is a binary variable equal to 1 if respondent reports that their partner knows about the totality of the income that they earn personally. Variables are coded separately for men and women. Collected at endline only.* | Increase | |
| Woman’s control over her personal income (women) | Binary variable equal to 1 if the woman reported that decisions over the use of her personal income are made mainly by her rather than being shared or made mainly by someone else in the household. | Increase | |
| Degree of decision-making of woman over household expenses (women) | Continuous variable that is defined as the sum of the domains of decision-making the woman participates in. A woman participates in a given decision when she alone or jointly with someone else makes the decision. The indicators included in the index are recoded as binary indicators equal to 1 if she participates in the decision-making. The domains included are: (1) large household expenses; (2) minor daily household expenses; (3) children schooling expenses. | Increase | Adapted from the Cote d’Ivoire Men in Partnership study questionnaire |
| Men’s involvement in housework (women) | Continuous variable that is the sum of responses to questions about the division of the following tasks in the household: (1) childcare, (2) cleaning/tidying the house, (3) buying food/going to the market, (4) washing clothes, (5) looking after livestock, (6) fetching wood, (7) fetching water, (8) following the girls’ education and activities, (9) following the boys’ education and activities. Respondents were asked who was responsible for each task in the last 3 months. Lower values of the index indicate a larger responsibility of the woman, higher values of the index signify increased participation of husband. Items are recoded as 0 if the answer is ‘someone else’. | Increase | Adapted from the Cote d’Ivoire Men in Partnership study questionnaire |
| Time spent on domestic tasks (women/men) | Total number of hours spent by the woman (man) on cleaning/tidying the house and cooking in the past 24 hours. Collected at endline only. | Increase (men), decrease (women) | |
| Time spent on childcare (women/men) | Total number of hours spent by the woman (man) on childcare in the past 24 hours. Collected at endline only. | Increase (men), decrease (women) | |
*Although these data were collected at baseline for the female respondents, changes in the way the question was asked between baseline and endline make the use of this information impossible.
IRC, International Rescue Committee; STI, sexually transmitted infection.
Baseline demographics, overall and by treatment arm
| Demographics | Overall | EMAP | Control | |||
| n | % or mean (SD) | n | % or mean (SD) | n | % or mean (SD) | |
| Men’s age (mean) | 1251 | 41.2 (25.6) | 622 | 41.7 (23.8) | 629 | 40.8 (27.8) |
| Women’s age (mean) | 1091 | 35.7 (24.8) | 555 | 36.1 (26.9) | 536 | 35.3 (23) |
| Men’s schooling | 1091 | 545 | 546 | |||
| Primary (any) | 29.6% | 30.8% | 28.4% | |||
| Secondary education or higher (any) | 47.4% | 44.6% | 50.2% | |||
| Women’s schooling | 1126 | 567 | 559 | |||
| Primary (any) | 26.4% | 25.2% | 27.5% | |||
| Secondary education or higher (any) | 17.9% | 16.4% | 19.5% | |||
| Household size (women’s report) | 1181 | 7.3 (5.5) | 591 | 7.3 (5.5) | 590 | 7.3 (5.6) |
| Polygamous (women’s report) | 1215 | 15.5% | 602 | 15.1% | 613 | 16% |
EMAP, Engaging Men through Accountable Practice.
Intention-to-treat analysis of EMAP impact at endline
| Baseline | Endline | Unadjusted OR or β (SE) | Adjusted OR or β (SE)† | Total n | |||
| EMAP | Control | EMAP | Control | ||||
| % or mean (SD) | % or mean (SD) | % or mean (SD) | % or mean (SD) | ||||
| Any intimate partner violence | 72.1% | 70.7% | 70.6% | 72.1% | OR=0.94 (0.11) | OR=0.96 (0.12) | 1059/982 |
| Physical or sexual IPV | 48.5% | 47.7% | 48.5% | 49.0% | OR=0.96 (0.15) | OR=0.95 (0.14) | 1028/933 |
| Physical IPV | 37.1% | 36.5% | 35.0% | 38.1% | OR=0.84 (0.13) | OR=0.87 (0.12) | 1044/943 |
| Severe physical IPV | 33.4% | 31.1% | 30.7% | 33.1% | OR=0.86 (0.14) | OR=0.91 (0.13) | 1038/925 |
| Sexual IPV | 29.9% | 34.4% | 32.7% | 34.9% | OR=0.88 (0.14) | OR=0.98 (0.15) | 1045/968 |
| Emotional IPV | 65.5% | 63.4% | 63.6% | 65.2% | OR=0.95 (0.12) | OR=0.92 (0.12) | 1056/970 |
| Economic abuse | 23.6% | 26.1% | 21.2% | 25.2% | OR=0.78 (0.12) | OR=0.82 (0.13) | 1097/1046 |
| Men’s intention to commit violence | 6.47 (9.46) | 6.64 (8.59) | 4.08 (11.25) | 4.97 (13.38) | β=−0.84*** (0.27) | β=−0.76*** (0.23) | 1252/1055 |
| Acceptance of physical violence | 35.0% | 33.6% | 26.3% | 35.5% | OR=0.68***(0.08) | OR=0.59***(0.08) | 1248/1043 |
| Ability to refuse sex | 13.2% | 13.0% | 20.4% | 15.0% | OR=1.40**(0.19) | OR=1.47** (0.24) | 1247/1042 |
| Gender equitable attitudes | 9.97 (4.84) | 10.58 (5.48) | 11.35 (3.60) | 10.31 (5.92) | β=1.05*** (0.18) | β=1.35*** (0.15) | 1240/1015 |
| Quality of relationship | 8.83 (5.63) | 8.82 (6.77) | 9.33 (4.52) | 9.06 (4.90) | β=0.26 (0.20) | β=0.28* (0.16) | 1097/1051 |
| Perception of negative male behaviours | 3.08 (6.12) | 3.25 (7.42) | 2.95 (4.68) | 3.32 (6.83) | β=−0.39 (0.24) | β=−0.32** (0.12) | 1097/1051 |
| Woman lets her partner know the totality of her income | NU | NU | 86.9% | 82.2% | OR=1.50***(0.21) | OR=1.66***(0.21) | 1089/1043 |
| Man lets his partner know the totality of his income | NA | NA | 89.7% | 82.5% | OR=2.03***(0.33) | OR=2.02***(0.38) | 1165/1049 |
| Woman’s control over her personal income | 53.2% | 56.4% | 52.5% | 56.4% | OR=0.87 (0.11) | OR=0.86 (0.11) | 1089/1030 |
| Degree of decision-making of woman over household expenses | 1.48 (2.93) | 1.49 (2.12) | 1.40 (2.36) | 1.40 (2.45) | β=0.017 (0.06) | β=0.015 (0.05) | 1097/1051 |
| Men’s involvement in housework | 13.61 (14.26) | 14.22 (16.34) | 14.63 (13.87) | 14.01 (13.19) | β=0.69** (0.34) | β=0.92*** (0.29) | 1097/1051 |
| Women’s time spent on domestic tasks | NA | NA | 193.18 (243.02) | 182.35 (185.36) | β=10.28* (5.48) | β=12.44** (5.70) | 1126/1079 |
| Women’s time spent on childcare | NA | NA | 131.82 (185.35) | 142.68 (312.68) | β=−10.29 (8.62) | β=−7.74 (6.19) | 1126/1079 |
| Men’s time spent on domestic tasks | NA | NA | 59.70 (135.17) | 28.10 (60.78) | β=34.42*** (4.36) | β=36.01*** (4.44) | 1253/1056 |
| Men’s time spent on childcare | NA | NA | 83.35 (151.46) | 61.12 (251.46) | β=24.22*** (5.82) | β=25.63*** (6.11) | 1250/1054 |
In adjusted and unadjusted models we controlled for site pairs and SEs are clustered at the site level. ‘NA’ indicates that the data were not collected at baseline. ‘NU’ indicates that the data were collected but were not used due to issues in the way the question was administered at baseline.
*Indicates significance at 10% level, ** at 5% level, *** at 1% level.
†Adjusted for site pairs, baseline report of outcome, household size, men and women’s age, men and women’s education and the language of the interview.
EMAP, Engaging Men through Accountable Practice; IPV, intimate partner violence.