Psychological and minor physical violence victimization is common in opposite-sex romantic relationships during adolescence. The sex-specific associations between sociodemographic characteristics and patterns of partner violence victimization underscore the importance of pursuing longitudinal, theory-driven investigations of the characteristics and developmental histories of both partners in a couple to advance understanding of this public health problem.
Purpose
To determine the prevalence of patterns of intimate partner violence (IPV) victimization from adolescence to young adulthood, and document associations with selected sociodemographic and experiential factors.
Methods
We used prospective data from the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health to group 4,134 respondents reporting only opposite-sex romantic or sexual relationships in adolescence and young adulthood into four victimization patterns: no IPV victimization, adolescent-limited IPV victimization, young adult onset IPV victimization, and adolescent-young adult persistent IPV victimization.
Results
Forty percent of respondents reported physical or sexual victimization by young adulthood. Eight percent experienced IPV only in adolescence, 25% only in young adulthood, and 7% showed persistent victimization. Female sex, Hispanic and non-Hispanic black race/ethnicity, an atypical family structure (something other than two biologic parents, step family, single parent), more romantic partners, experiencing childhood abuse, and early sexual debut (before age 16) were each associated with one or more patterns of victimization versus none. Number of romantic partners and early sexual debut were the most consistent predictors of violence, its timing of onset, and whether victimization persisted across developmental periods. These associations did not vary by biological sex.
Conclusions
Substantial numbers of young adults have experienced physical or sexual IPV victimization. More research is needed to understand the developmental and experiential mechanisms underlying timing of onset of victimization, whether victimization persists across time and relationships, and whether etiology and temporal patterns vary by type of violence. These additional distinctions would inform the timing, content, and targeting of violence prevention efforts.
Forty-six practicing physicians and 357 patients with diabetes mellitus or congestive heart failure were the subjects for this study, which focuses on the impact of medication regimen and doctor-patient communication in affecting patient medication-taking behavior and physician awareness of these behaviors.Four types of medication errors were defined: omissions, commissions, scheduling misconceptions and scheduling non-compliance. The average error rates were 19 per cent, 19 per cent, 17 per cent and 3 per cent, respectively. The combined average error was 58 per cent; scheduling non-compliance on the part of the patient was a minor component.Specific aspects of the medication regimen were associated with increased errors: (1) the more drugs in-
North Carolina women were surveyed to examine whether women's disability status was associated with their risk of being assaulted within the past year. Women's violence experiences were classified into three groups: no violence, physical assault only (without sexual assault), and sexual assault (with or without physical assault). Multivariable analysis revealed that women with disabilities were not significantly more likely than women without disabilities to have experienced physical assault alone within the past year (odds ratio [OR] = 1.18, 95% Confidence Interval [CI] = 0.62 to 2.27); however, women with disabilities had more than 4 times the odds of experiencing sexual assault in the past year compared to women without disabilities (OR = 4.89, 95% CI = 2.21 to 10.83).
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.