• Lancet · Apr 2012

    Review Meta Analysis

    Prevalence and risk of violence against adults with disabilities: a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies.

    • Karen Hughes, Mark A Bellis, Lisa Jones, Sara Wood, Geoff Bates, Lindsay Eckley, Ellie McCoy, Christopher Mikton, Tom Shakespeare, and Alana Officer.
    • Centre for Public Health, Liverpool John Moores University, UK.
    • Lancet. 2012 Apr 28;379(9826):1621-9.

    BackgroundAbout 15% of adults worldwide have a disability. These individuals are frequently reported to be at increased risk of violence, yet quantitative syntheses of studies of this issue are scarce. We aimed to quantify violence against adults with disabilities.MethodsIn this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched 12 electronic databases to identify primary research studies published between Jan 1, 1990, and Aug 17, 2010, reporting prevalence estimates of violence against adults (aged mainly ≥18 years) with disabilities, or their risk of violence compared with non-disabled adults. We included only studies reporting violence occurring within the 12 months before the study. We assessed studies with six core quality criteria, and pooled data for analysis.FindingsOf 10,663 references initially identified, 26 were eligible for inclusion, with data for 21,557 individuals with disabilities. 21 studies provided data suitable for meta-analysis of prevalence of violence, and ten for meta-analysis of risks of violence. Pooled prevalence of any (physical, sexual, or intimate partner) recent violence was 24·3% (95% CI 18·3-31·0) in people with mental illnesses, 6·1% (2·5-11·1) in those with intellectual impairments, and 3·2% (2·5-4·1) in those with non-specific impairments. We identified substantial heterogeneity in most prevalence estimates (I(2) >75%). We noted large uncertainty around pooled risk estimates. Pooled crude odds ratios for the risk of violence in disabled compared with non-disabled individuals were 1·50 (95% CI 1·09-2·05) for all studies combined, 1·31 (0·93-1·84) for people with non-specific impairments, 1·60 (1·05-2·45) for people with intellectual impairments, and 3·86 (0·91-16·43) for those with mental illnesses.InterpretationAdults with disabilities are at a higher risk of violence than are non-disabled adults, and those with mental illnesses could be particularly vulnerable. However, available studies have methodological weaknesses and gaps exist in the types of disability and violence they address. Robust studies are absent for most regions of the world, particularly low-income and middle-income countries.FundingWHO Department of Violence and Injury Prevention and Disability.Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…

Want more great medical articles?

Keep up to date with a free trial of metajournal, personalized for your practice.
1,624,503 articles already indexed!

We guarantee your privacy. Your email address will not be shared.