Related Experiment Video
Updated: Dec 26, 2025

Rapid Fractionation and Isolation of Whole Blood Components in Samples Obtained from a Community-based Setting
Published on: November 30, 2015
Co-Occurrence of Multiple Risk Factors and Intimate Partner Violence in an Urban Emergency Department
Raul Caetano1, Carol B Cunradi1, Harrison J Alter2
1Pacific Institute for Research and Evaluation, Prevention Research Center, Berkeley, California.
Introduction:
Urban emergency departments (ED) provide care to populations with multiple health-related and overlapping risk factors, many of which are associated with intimate partner violence (IPV). We examine the 12-month rate of physical IPV and its association with multiple joint risk factors in an urban ED.
Methods:
Research assistants surveyed patients regarding IPV exposure, associated risk factors, and other sociodemographic features. The joint occurrence of seven risk factors was measured by a variable scored 0-7 with the following risk factors: depression; adverse childhood experiences; drug use; impulsivity; post-traumatic stress disorder; at-risk drinking; and partner's score on the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test. The survey (N = 1037) achieved an 87.5% participation rate.
Results:
About 23% of the sample reported an IPV event in the prior 12 months. Logistic regression showed that IPV risk increased in a stepwise fashion with the number of present risk factors, as follows: one risk factor (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] [3.09]; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.47-6.50; p<.01); two risk factors (AOR [6.26]; 95% CI, 3.04-12.87; p<.01); three risk factors (AOR = 9.44; 95% CI, 4.44-20.08; p<.001); four to seven risk factors (AOR [18.62]; 95% CI, 9.00-38.52; p<001). Ordered logistic regression showed that IPV severity increased in a similar way, as follows: one risk factor (AOR [3.17]; 95% CI, 1.39-7.20; p<.01); two risk factors (AOR [6.73]; 95% CI, 3.04-14.90; p<.001); three risk factors (AOR [10.36]; 95%CI, 4.52-23.76; p<.001); four to seven risk factors (AOR [20.61]; 95% CI, 9.11-46.64; p<001).
Conclusion:
Among patients in an urban ED, IPV likelihood and IPV severity increase with the number of reported risk factors. The best approach to identify IPV and avoid false negatives is, therefore, multi-risk assessment.
More Related Videos
Related Concept Videos
Hazard Ratio
For example, in a clinical trial...
Relative Risk
Factors Affecting the Risk of Infection
The integrity and count of the white blood cells help the body resist pathogens and fight infection. When impaired, it reduces the body's resistance to pathogens. The acidic pH levels of the gastrointestinal, genitourinary tracts, and skin...
Prevalence and Incidence
Prevalence indicates the proportion of individuals in a population who have a specific disease or health...
Acute Coronary Syndrome IV: Interprofessional Care
Aneurysm III: Interprofessional Care

