23
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Domestic violence during the COVID-19 pandemic - Evidence from a systematic review and meta-analysis

      review-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Purpose

          The aim of this review was to estimate the effect of COVID-19-related restrictions (i.e., stay at home orders, lockdown orders) on reported incidents of domestic violence.

          Methods

          A systematic review of articles was conducted in various databases and a meta-analysis was also performed. The search was carried out based on conventional scientific standards that are outlined in the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P) and studies needed to meet certain criteria.

          Results

          Analyses were conducted with a random effects restricted maximum likelihood model. Eighteen empirical studies (and 37 estimates) that met the general inclusion criteria were used. Results showed that most study estimates were indicative of an increase in domestic violence post-lockdowns. The overall mean effect size was 0.66 (CI: 0.08–1.24). The effects were stronger when only US studies were considered.

          Conclusion

          Incidents of domestic violence increased in response to stay-at-home/lockdown orders, a finding that is based on several studies from different cities, states, and several countries around the world.

          Related collections

          Most cited references47

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement

          Systematic reviews should build on a protocol that describes the rationale, hypothesis, and planned methods of the review; few reviews report whether a protocol exists. Detailed, well-described protocols can facilitate the understanding and appraisal of the review methods, as well as the detection of modifications to methods and selective reporting in completed reviews. We describe the development of a reporting guideline, the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses for Protocols 2015 (PRISMA-P 2015). PRISMA-P consists of a 17-item checklist intended to facilitate the preparation and reporting of a robust protocol for the systematic review. Funders and those commissioning reviews might consider mandating the use of the checklist to facilitate the submission of relevant protocol information in funding applications. Similarly, peer reviewers and editors can use the guidance to gauge the completeness and transparency of a systematic review protocol submitted for publication in a journal or other medium.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015: elaboration and explanation

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              Operating Characteristics of a Rank Correlation Test for Publication Bias

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                J Crim Justice
                J Crim Justice
                Journal of Criminal Justice
                Elsevier Ltd.
                0047-2352
                0047-2352
                9 March 2021
                May-June 2021
                9 March 2021
                : 74
                : 101806
                Affiliations
                [a ]University of Miami, Department of Sociology, 5202 University Drive, Merrick Building, Rm 120, Coral Gables, FL 33124, United States of America
                [b ]Monash University, Criminology, Melbourne, Australia
                [c ]School of Applied Sciences, Department of Criminal Justice & Legal Studies, The University of Mississippi, 84 Dormitory Row West, H313, P.O. Box 1848, University, MS 38677-1848, United States of America
                [d ]Crime and Justice Institute, A Division of Community Resources for Justice , 355 Boylston Street, Boston, MA 02116, United States of America
                [e ]University of Central Florida, Department of Criminology and Criminal Justice, Health Sciences 1, Suite 311, Orlando, Florida 32816 – 2200, United States of America
                [f ]University of Miami, Miller School of Medicine, Institute for Advanced Study of the Americas, Pick Hall1541 Brescia Ave Coral Gables, Florida 33146, United States of America
                Author notes
                [* ]Corresponding author at: University of Miami, Department of Sociology, 5202 University Drive, Merrick Building, Rm 120, Coral Gables, FL 33124, United States of America.
                Article
                S0047-2352(21)00026-X 101806
                10.1016/j.jcrimjus.2021.101806
                9582712
                36281275
                21ebf229-6531-4260-b28a-6eed59f54ffd
                © 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

                Since January 2020 Elsevier has created a COVID-19 resource centre with free information in English and Mandarin on the novel coronavirus COVID-19. The COVID-19 resource centre is hosted on Elsevier Connect, the company's public news and information website. Elsevier hereby grants permission to make all its COVID-19-related research that is available on the COVID-19 resource centre - including this research content - immediately available in PubMed Central and other publicly funded repositories, such as the WHO COVID database with rights for unrestricted research re-use and analyses in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for free by Elsevier for as long as the COVID-19 resource centre remains active.

                History
                : 20 February 2021
                : 5 March 2021
                : 5 March 2021
                Categories
                Article

                meta-analysis,covid-19,domestic violence,lockdowns
                meta-analysis, covid-19, domestic violence, lockdowns

                Comments

                Comment on this article