FILES



Summary PDF: What works to prevent and respond to intimate partner violence among refugees?

M&E | Track Resource Download
   Safety

SHARE

What works to prevent and respond to intimate partner violence among refugees?

A variety of interventions may be effective in preventing or responding to intimate partner violence (IPV) among refugees.

  • Strong evidence supports the effectiveness of IPV prevention and response interventions that: consider the unique contexts of refugees and immigrants, engage with community members, and are tailored according to participants’ lived experiences, needs, and abilities.
  • There is strong support for the effectiveness of group interventions among immigrant Latinas. There is suggestive support for this intervention among other immigrant and refugee groups.
  • Moderate and suggestive evidence support the short-term effectiveness of dating violence prevention groups for some refugee adolescents.
  • Evidence suggests that men’s groups may have beneficial effects for IPV perpetrators.
  • Evidence suggests that family therapy may be a helpful response for some refugee groups. This is an area requiring further research.
  • Refugee service providers, including community-based organizations, should collaborate with local IPV prevention/intervention providers to develop culturally tailored interventions.

Studies included in the database focused on high-income or upper middle-income countries, including but not limited to the United States. Studies included must have been published since 2000. To identify evidence, we searched the following websites and databases using the following population, methodology, and target intervention terms:

Websites and Databases Population Terms Methodology Terms Target Problem Terms
Campbell Collaboration
Cochrane Collaboration
Mathematica Policy Research
Evidence Aid
Urban Institute
Migration Policy Institute
HHS OPRE
ASSIA
Social Services Abstracts
Social Work Abstracts
PsycInfo
refugee
OR
immigrant
OR
“unaccompanied minor”
OR
asylee
OR
“temporary protected status”
OR
“victims of traffick*”
OR
“traffick* victims”
OR
T-Visa
OR
U-Visa
OR
Cuban
OR
Haitian
OR
Amerasian
evaluation
OR
impact
OR
program
OR
intervention
OR
policy
OR
project
OR
train*
OR
therapy
OR
treatment
OR
counseling
OR
workshop
OR
review
OR
meta-analysis
OR
synthesis
“intimate partner violence” OR “domestic violence” ”

For databases or websites that permitted only basic searches, free-text terms and limited term combinations were selected out of the lists above, and all resultant studies were reviewed for relevance. Conversely, for databases or websites with advanced search capability, we made use of relevant filters available. All search terms were searched in the title and abstract fields only in order to exclude studies that made only passing mention of the topic under consideration.

After initial screening, Switchboard evidence mapping is prioritized as follows: First priority is given to meta-analyses and systematic reviews, followed by individual impact evaluations when no meta-analyses or systematic reviews are available. Evaluations that are rated as impact evidence are considered before those rated as suggestive, with the latter only being included for outcomes where no evidence is available from the former.