Background: Intimate partner violence (IPV) affects outcomes of mothers and their offspring. This systematic review collated the worldwide literature on the prevalence rates of different types of IPV in pregnancy.Methods: Two reviewers independently identified cross sectional and cohort studies of IPV prevalence in pregnancy in online databases (PubMed, WOS and Scopus), selected and extracted data [participants' country, study quality, measurement tool (validation and purpose) and rates of IPV in pregnancy]. We considered a high quality study if it had a prospective design, an adequate sampling method, a sample size estimation, a response rate > 90%, a contemporary ascertainment of IPV in the index pregnancy, and a well-developed detailed IPV tool. We performed random effects meta-analysis and explored reasons for heterogeneity of rates.Results: One hundred fifty-five studies were included, of which 44 (28%) met two-thirds of the quality criteria. Worldwide prevalence of physical (126 studies, 220,462 participants), psychological (113 studies, 189,630 participants) and sexual (98 studies, 155,324 participants) IPV in pregnancy was 9.2% (95% CI 7.7–11.1%, I2 95.9%), 18.7% (15.1–22.9%, I2 98.2%), 5.5% (4.0–7.5%, I2 93.4%), respectively. Where several types of IPV were reported combined, the prevalence of any kind of IPV (118 studies, 124,838 participants) was 25.0% (20.3, 30.5%, I2 98.6%). IPV rates varied within and between continents, being the highest in Africa and the lowest in Europe (p < 0.001). Rates also varied according to measurement purpose, being higher for diagnosis than for screening, in physical (p = 0.022) and sexual (p = 0.014) IPV.Conclusions: IPV prevalence in pregnancy varies across countries, with one-quarter of mothers exposed on average globally. Routine systematic antenatal detection should be applied worldwide.Systematic Review Registration: identifier: CRD42020176131.

Background: Intimate partner violence (IPV) is a public health concern, especially during pregnancy, and needs to be urgently addressed. In order to establish effective actions for the prevention of IPV during pregnancy, authorities must be aware of the real burden of IPV. This review aimed to summarize the existing evidence about IPV prevalence during pregnancy worldwide. Methods: A review of reviews was carried out. All published systematic reviews and meta-analyses published until October 2020 were identified through PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science. The main outcome was the IPV prevalence during pregnancy. Results: A total of 12 systematic reviews were included in the review, 5 of them including meta-analysis. The quality of the reviews was variable. Physical IPV during pregnancy showed a wide range (1.6–78%), as did psychological IPV (1.8–67.4%). Conclusions: Available data about IPV prevalence during pregnancy were of low quality and showed high figures for physical and psychological IPV. The existing evidence syntheses do not capture the totality of the worldwide disease burden of IPV in pregnancy.

No abstract