{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.01967892283790782, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0010357327809425167, 'mean_word_length': 5.662068965517242, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials for Intimate Partner Violence: The Effects of the Programs Based on Their Purposes.

Background: Intimate partner violence (IPV) is a complex global problem that has serious health consequences for victims. Many intervention programs have been introduced for IPV, with various target populations, purposes, designs, and outcomes. However, a consensus has not been reached regarding which type of program has the greatest impact. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to examine the effects of existing interventions on IPV risk and to compare the effects of the interventions based on their purposes and designs. Method: A systematic review and meta-analytic method were utilized in this study. Through a rigorous database search, 13 randomized controlled trials that met the inclusion and exclusion criteria were selected and included in the analysis. Results: The included interventions had a small effect size, which was statistically significant. The couple interventions aiming to reduce the risk of IPV perpetration and victimization simultaneously showed the greatest impact, compared to bystander interventions and interventions targeting either perpetrators or victims. The interventions aiming to reduce the risk of IPV perpetration showed a significant impact on changing gender equality-related knowledge and attitudes, and those aiming to reduce the risk of IPV victimization were effective in increasing knowledge and changing attitudes related to traditional norms, empowerment, and health conditions. The interventions targeting bystanders showed significant effects on increasing bystander-related attitudes and behaviors. Conclusion: Our findings provide strong evidence for future intervention programs for IPV. Long-term research to follow-up actual IPV reductions after interventions will be needed to confirm the findings of this study.