Title: Gender-based violence and associated factors among women in Ethiopia: a systematic
review and meta-analysis
Version: 2 Date: 08 Apr 2025
Reviewer:  Mohammed Hammad Jaber Amin
Reviewer's report:
Overall Assessment:
The abstract presents a systematic review and meta-analysis on a crucial public health issue:
gender-based violence (GBV) among women in Ethiopia. The topic is highly relevant, and the
aim of estimating the cumulative prevalence and associated factors is worthwhile. However, the
abstract can be improved in terms of clarity, detail, and adherence to standard reporting practices.
Specific Comments & Suggestions:
1. Background:
Clarity: The background is adequate but could be stronger. It states that GBV is a public health
concern and that prevalence in Ethiopia is not well systematized. Consider adding a sentence
or two to contextualize the problem.
Example: "Gender-based violence (GBV) represents a significant global public health and
human rights challenge. In Ethiopia, despite ongoing efforts to address GBV, the true extent
of the problem remains unclear due to inconsistencies in prevalence estimates across different
studies."
Justification: Briefly explain why a systematic review and meta-analysis is necessary. What gaps
in knowledge will this research address?
2. Methods:
Search Strategy:
The search dates (November 10, 2024 to November 30, 2024) are in the future. This should be
corrected to reflect the actual search dates.
The search strategy mentions several databases, which is good. However, it lacks specifics.
Consider adding a very brief indication of the keywords used. (e.g., "Search terms included
variations of 'gender-based violence,' 'domestic violence,' 'Ethiopia,' and 'women'.").
Eligibility Criteria:
"Predetermine eligibility criteria were used to select articles." This is vague. What were the
key inclusion/exclusion criteria (e.g., study design, population, definition of GBV, language)?
Mentioning this briefly will enhance transparency.
Quality Assessment:
The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) is mentioned, which is appropriate.
Statistical Analysis:
The use of random effects meta-analysis and STATA 17 is appropriate given the likely
heterogeneity.
Mentioning subgroup analysis or meta-regression (if conducted) would be useful.
Publication Bias:
Funnel plot inspection and Egger's test are mentioned, which is good.
Consider adding the definition of Gender-Based Violence used.
3. Results:
Prevalence: The pooled prevalence of 51.34% is concerning and highlights the gravity of the
issue.
Associated Factors:
The list of associated factors is helpful, but it could be improved by being more specific. For
example, instead of "young age," provide a range (e.g., "younger age groups (e.g., 15-24 years)").
Instead of "tight family control" specify what outcomes that was related to.
Were these factors identified through meta-regression or narrative synthesis of individual study
findings? This needs to be clarified. Indicate the type of analysis used to identify these factors.
It's important to specify the direction of the association (e.g., "increased odds of experiencing
GBV were associated with...").
4. Conclusion:
Conciseness: The conclusion is concise but could be slightly more informative.
Implications: Briefly mention the implications of the findings for policy, practice, or future
research.
Example: "The high prevalence of GBV underscores the urgent need for targeted interventions
in Ethiopia. Further research should focus on..."
Limitations: It would be ideal to briefly mention any limitations of the review.
5. General Comments:
PRISMA Adherence: Ensure the full systematic review adheres strictly to the PRISMA
guidelines. A PRISMA checklist should be included as supplementary material.
Language and Grammar: The abstract is generally well-written, but a careful proofread is
recommended to eliminate any minor grammatical errors or typos.
Prospero Registration: The registration number is provided, which is excellent.
Specific Suggestions for Revision:
Background: Add a sentence to contextualize the problem and justify the need for the review.
Methods:
Correct the search dates.
Provide brief examples of keywords used in the search.
Summarize the key inclusion/exclusion criteria.
Specify the statistical methods used to identify associated factors.
Results: Provide more specific details about the associated factors and their direction of
association.
Conclusion: Add a sentence about the implications of the findings and a brief mention of
limitations.
Example of Revised Excerpt (Methods Section):
"Methods: A comprehensive search of literatures was conducted from PubMed, Medline,
HINARI, EMBASE, Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar from November 10, 2023
to November 30, 2023, following the PRISMA guidelines. Search terms included variations
of 'gender-based violence,' 'domestic violence,' 'Ethiopia,' and 'women.' Studies were included
if they reported primary data on the prevalence of GBV among women in Ethiopia, used a
cross-sectional, cohort, or case-control design, and were published in English. Studies focusing
on specific subgroups (e.g., pregnant women only) were excluded. The quality of studies was
evaluated using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. Inspection of the Funnel plot and Egger’s test were
used to evaluate the evidence of publication bias. The heterogeneity of the included studies
was evaluated using Cochrane Q and I2 test. A random effects meta-analysis was computed to
determine the pooled estimate of gender-based violence using STATA 17. Associated factors
were identified through ."
In summary, this is a valuable study addressing an important issue. By addressing the points
raised in this review, the authors can significantly strengthen the abstract and improve the overall
impact of their research.