Title: Experience of controlling behaviour and intimate partner violence among women of
reproductive age in sub-Saharan Africa
Version: 5 Date: 19 Dec 2024
Reviewer's report:
PEER REVIEWER ASSESSMENTS:
OBJECTIVE - Full research articles: is there a clear objective that addresses a testable research
question(s) (brief or other article types: is there a clear objective)?
Yes - there is a clear objective
DESIGN - Is the current approach (including controls and analysis protocols) appropriate for
the objective?
Yes - the approach is appropriate
EXECUTION - Are the experiments and analyses performed with technical rigor to allow
confidence in the results?
No - there are minor issues
STATISTICS - Is the use of statistics in the manuscript appropriate?
No - there are issues with the statistics in the study
INTERPRETATION - Is the current interpretation/discussion of the results reasonable and not
overstated?
Yes - the author's interpretation is reasonable
OVERALL MANUSCRIPT POTENTIAL - Is the current version of this work technically
sound? If not, can revisions be made to make the work technically sound?
Probably - with minor revisions
PEER REVIEWER COMMENTS:
GENERAL COMMENTS: Intimate Partner Violence (IPV) is a behavior between two partners
in an intimate relationship that can facilitate physical, sexual, and physiological or emotional
harm e.g. physical aggression, sexual coercion, psychological abuse, and controlling behaviors.
Controlling behavior is a deliberate action often applied to manipulate and gain power over
another person, making him/her feel angry, afraid, inferior, intimidated, embarrassed, e.t.c.
Given the above definitions, it is unclear the type of relationship that the authors attempted to
establish between a variable and itself bearing in mind the fact that controlling behavior is a
component of IPV. Such a relationship could be spurious, except a clear boundary is drawn
between the two in the paper.
REQUESTED REVISIONS:
Method:
The outcome variables in this study are physical, emotional, and sexual violence. Therefore,
the authors must explain clearly the measurement mechanism used for coding these variables
in this study. What are the variables and classifications used for measuring physical, emotional,
and sexual violence? These should be included in the manuscript to enable the readers to
ascertain whether the correct methodology was adopted and also shape their understanding of
the procedure.
Excerpt, Lines 155-156: “The resulting values were categorized into ‘low’, ‘medium’, and
‘high’” What was the overall score? What were the scores for low, medium, and high partner
controlling behaviour?
The following explanatory variables should be included in the analysis: Religion (Christianity,
Islam, Others), Number of living children (0, 1-2, 3-4, 5+), Family type [Number of cowives
(0=Monogamy, 1+ =Polygamy)], Decision-making power (check the appropriate variables for
its measurement as indicated in DHS dictionary).
Exposure to mass media is a new variable generated from other variables by the authors. An
explanation of how the variable was created should be provided in the manuscript.
Why the use of multinomial regression analysis? The categories of IPV are expected to be
dichotomous. Experiencing any IPV is a preference measurement of IPV over experiencing II
or III. Experiencing at least one form of IPV is inimical to one's health. This has implications
for morbidity and mortality for the victims. I recommend that multivariable logistic regression
be used for the analysis with restriction to any form of IPV as an indicator.
Multilevel is a hierarchical data structure in which nesting often consists of repeated measures
within subjects, as in cluster sampling. Therefore, more explanations should be provided about
the multilevel analysis as used in the current study. The inclusion of the variables that constituted
the individual and the community factors is necessary in the method section.
ADDITIONAL REQUESTS/SUGGESTIONS:
Title: Data were analysed for only women of reproductive age but not all women. Therefore,
the title can be reframed as: “Experience of partner controlling behaviour and intimate partner
violence among women of reproductive age in sub-Saharan Africa”
Abstract
In the method section, the study participants are not all women, but women of reproductive
or women aged 15-49 years. Necessary adjustments are to be made in the section. The
method section should include the measurement metrics for ‘partner controlling behavior’.
The descriptive statistics (mean age of the women, the prevalence of partner control behavior,
physical violence, sexual violence, emotional violence, and IPV) about the studied subjects are
to be included as the opening sentences in the results section. The conclusion from the study
should not be reported in broad terms. What was the direction of the link between partner-
controlling behaviors and IPV? The first recommendation (excerpt: “underscoring the urgency
for policymakers and stakeholders to implement proactive measures that protect and empower
women experiencing IPV”) did not emerge from the findings of this study and as such is
subjective. This I think should be expunged. The issue of SDGs is not within the scope of this
study. However, it can be included in the introduction of the main paper.
Keywords: ‘Women’ should be replaced with ‘Women in sexual union’; ‘Demographic and
Health Survey’ should be deleted.
Introduction
Although most countries in SSA are patrilineal, some others are matrilineal, therefore, the
cultural heterogeneity between and within countries in SSA and how this influences IPV should
be stated in the paper. Expansion of the study in terms of coverage should not be the main
rationale for this study, rather authors are to provide some pertinent reasons why they feel
the current study is much needed in SSA at this present time. What did the current study do
differently from the earlier studies? The narratives in the section should be contextualized with
more information that drives IPV in SSA.
Discussion
The section was well written and the important findings related to the study objectives were
accurately and adequately discussed. However, a paragraph should be devoted to the policy
implication of each of the findings. The differences in data collection time (2015 – 2021) for
various countries might wrongly influence the results and findings. This should be included as
one of the limitations of the study. The conclusion section is expected to ventilate the study’s
primary message in consonance with its goals. This is completely missing in the section. Besides,
the recommendations should be more specific to the study. The issue of SDGs is not within the
scope of this study. As indicated earlier, it can be included in the introduction of the main paper
but not the conclusion section.