This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Saltzman, L. E. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Saltzman, L. E. Social Bookmarking                   What's this?

Issues Related to Defining and Measuring Violence Against Women

Response to Kilpatrick

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

This paper asserts that although there is considerable agreement in the U.S. and internationally about the importance of uniform terminology and measurement related to violence against women, we need a strategy for choosing standardized definitions and measures. Responding to Kilpatrick’s comments at the October 2003 national research conference on violence against women, the author stresses the importance of developing and using uniform terminology related to violence against women, and discusses the lack of a formal mechanism to achieve uniformity of definitions and measurement. Uncertainty about the impact of context on survey findings and the lack of agreement about the optimal scope of measurement are discussed. The author also comments on some difficulties associated with implementing Kilpatrick’s proposed modifications to existing measures of rape and sexual assault.

Key Words: definitions • terminology • measurement • public health surveillance • violence against women

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?