Reviewer's report
Title:Factors associated with wife beating in Egypt: analysis of two surveys
(1995 and 2005)
Version: 5Date:14 August 2008
Reviewer: Farah Ahmad
Reviewer's report:
The authors have incorporated the major suggestions. Here are some comment
to be further considered:
1. “Incidence” versus “rate”: Please consider using the term “rate” instead of
“incidence” throughout the paper. The questions about wife beating asked
whether this occurred during the last 12 months. The “yes” responses to this
question can’t be called incidence unless this was the very first experience ever
for the respondent. In other statistical reports, the rates of IPV during the last 12
months are also referred to “12-month prevalence” or “prevalence in the last
year”.
2. Abstract: please consider adding a sentence about limitation of study due to
different measures used in 1995 and 2005. Further, the last sentence “Education
programs…” is unclear. Do you mean something like this: “Community education
programs, though not sufficient on its own, should target not only women but
men as well in order to decrease the rates of wife beating”.
3. In the ‘result’ section (page 6, 2nd para), I found this finding very interesting:
“The estimates for education in bivariate and multivariate analysis were similar
for women’s education but nit for her partners’ education”. This suggests that
“education” has different pathways to perpetration of wife beating by men and
many “other” variables moderate the link between education and wife beating
perpetration. I suggest that the authors should build on this finding and include a
sentence or two in the discussion section regarding what these “other” possible
variables could be. In my view, these other variables are the macro-level
determinants such as: societal norms about wife beating, patriarchal ideology,
and gender roles etc.
4. In the ‘result’ section under ‘pattern of violence’ (page 6, para 5): it seems that
the authors’ forgot to add the result about the link between “education” and
various “patterns” of wife beating though this was the purpose of factor analysis
as stated in the 1st sentence of this sub-section.
5. In the ‘discussion’ section (page 7, para 1): the authors state “We are not
aware of any study directly comparing the two approaches with respect to
reporting of violence”. This has been reported previously; please review related
literature e.g.:
Smith, M.D. Enhancing the quality of survey data on violence against women: a
feminist approach. Gender and Society 1994;8(1): 109-127.
6. In the ‘conclusion’ sub-section of the discussion (page 8, para 2): The
statement “Thus, selective educational interventions directed specifically towards
women may simply leave these women with an uneducated partner and fail to
reduce wife beating levels” is not clear. What is the meaning of “educational
interventions” here? Does it mean school-years (i.e. literacy level) or does it
mean community awareness? I assume that authors are trying to say that
“Raising the bar of critical consciousness among women through women-specific
education is not sufficient. Wife beating is a behavior perpetrated by men and the
interventions need to target both men and women to foster critical awareness of
the issue and its harmful consequences going beyond victims”
Best wishes for your future endeavors.
Level of interest: An article of importance in its field
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: Yes, and I have assessed the statistics in my report.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests' below. If your reply is yes to any,
please give details below.