Dataset. Intimate partner violence types and symptoms of common mental disorders in rural Chiapas, Mexico

This data base was used for a study that examines the scope and characteristics of male-to-female intimate partner violence in southern rural Chiapas, Mexico, and its association with depression and anxiety symptoms, highlighting the role of partner controlling behaviors.<br>Participants were selected by random sampling. One-hundred and twenty eight women &gt;15 years participated. Data was obtained through an adapted version of the National Survey of the Dynamics of Household Relationships (ENDIREH) intimate partner violence scale, the Patient Health Questionnaire – 9 for depression symptoms and the Generalized Anxiety Disorder – 7 for anxiety symptoms. The study design followed the WHO “Ethic and Safety Recommendations for conducting research on Domestic Violence Against Women”. The protocol received ethical approval from the Institutional Review Board of the Harvard Medical School Office of Human Research Administration and the Chiapas Health Institute.<br><br>Frequency of physical, sexual and controlling violent events was assessed as follows: never happened, happened once, happened sometimes, happened many times. These categories were provided in the survey and are contingent upon each respondent’s consideration. Severity of IPV (physical and sexual) was categorized as low, moderate or severe. These categories were created through a combination of the frequency of violent events and the severity of events: being kicked, tied-up, choked, attacked with a machete/knife and attacked with a gun where considered severe regardless of frequency; being pushed, pulled by the hair, slapped, hit, or have objects thrown at her where defined as follows: a) low severity when the event(s) occurred once, b) moderate severity when events happened sometimes, and c) high severity when events happened many times. Similarly, being coerced to have sex, or forced to do specific sexual activities while having sex were categorized as follows: a) low severity if it happened once, b) moderate severity if it happened sometimes, and c) severe if it happened many times. In the case of having been forced to have sex through physical force, it was considered a) moderate severity when it happened once, and b) severe when it happened more than once. IPV was labeled as low, moderate or severe based on the physical or sexual violence item that was labeled most severe for each woman.Fourteen control tactics were asked to measure CB: 1) not permitting her to work outside of home; 2) taking away her property, belongings or money; 3) not permitting her to visit her family; 4) not providing with money for basic household needs when he did have; 5) humiliating, shaming or insulting her; 6) falsely accusing her of being unfaithful; 7) frightening her or making her feel afraid of him; 8) locking her in; 9) spying or monitoring her; 10) threatening her with throwing her out of the house; 11) putting the children against her; 12) threatening her with taking the children away from her; 13) threatening her with abandoning her; 14) threatening her with killing her. Partner CB level was categorized as: a) high with more than four control tactics were reported (highest tercile), b) moderate with one to four control tactics were reported, and c) no control when no control tactics reported. High-control IPV (HC-IPV) and moderate-control IPV (MC-IPV) categories were created to reflect Johnson’s suggested categories of Intimate Terrorism and Situational Couple Violence, respectively. IPV was labeled as HC-IPV whenever a) control was high irrespective of the severity of physical or sexual violence, and b) control was moderate and severity of physical or sexual violence was high. IPV was labeled as MC-IPV when a) severity was low, and control was none or moderate, b) when severity was moderate and control none or moderate, and c) when physical or sexual violence was severe and no control tactics were reported.