To address intimate partner violence (IPV) transnationally, we must examine standardization of both terminology and measurement. This article comments on public health surveillance and efforts toward standardizing terminology on violence against women and IPV. Starting with information about IPV from two U.S. surveys, it identifies issues including cueing and screening questions, survey context, repeat victimization, bounding, and question order to be considered in developing transnational research. Some steps for standardizing IPV measures include replicating initial findings in additional countries, agreeing on breadth of focus, determining strategies for choosing standard measures, and allowing for periodic updates to standardized definitions and measures.
Arscott-Mills, S. (2001). Intimate partner violence in Jamaica. A descriptive study of women who access the services of the Women’s Crisis Centre in Kingston. Violence Against Women, 7, 1284-1302.
3.
Bachman, R. (2000). A comparison of annual incidence rates and contextual characteristics of intimate-partner violence against women from the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) and the National Violence Against Women Survey (NVAWS). Violence Against Women, 6, 339-867.
4.
Basile, K. C., & Saltzman, L. E. (2002). Sexual violence surveillance: Uniform definitions and recommended data elements (version 1.0). Atlanta, GA: CDC, National Center for Injury Prevention and Control.
5.
Bureau of Justice Statistics. (n.d.). Comparison of critical factors. National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS). National Violence Against Women Survey (NVAWS) (Unpublished document). Washington, DC: Author.
6.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2000). Building data systems for monitoring and responding to violence against women: Recommendations from a workshop. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, 49(RR-11), 1-16.
7.
Craig Dodge, A., McLoughlin, E., Saltzman, L. E., Nah, G., Skaj, P., Campbell, J. C., et al. (2002). Improving intimate partner violence protocols for emergency departments. An assessment tool and findings. Violence Against Women, 8, 320-338.
8.
Crowell, N. A., & Burgess, A. W. (Eds.) (1996). Understanding violence against women. Washington, DC: National Research Council.
9.
DeKeseredy, W. S. (2000). Current controversies on defining nonlethal violence against women in intimate heterosexual relationships: Empirical implications. Violence Against Women, 6, 728-746.
10.
Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service. (1990). Healthy people 2000. National health promotion and disease prevention objectives. Washington, DC: Author.
11.
Desai, S., & Saltzman, L. E. (2001). Measurement issues for violence against women. In C. M. Renzetti, J. L. Edleson, & R. K. Bergen (Eds.), Sourcebook on violence against women (pp. 35-52). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
12.
Dietz, T. L., & Jasinski, J. L. (2003, July 13-16). Item order and disclosure rates of intimate partner violence: A quasi-experimental model. Published abstract, 8th International Family Violence Research Conference, Portsmouth, NH.
13.
Fisher, B. (in press). Measuring rape against women: The significance of survey questions. In B. Fisher (Ed.), Violence against women and family violence: Developments in research, practice, and policy [conference proceedings]. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice.
14.
Heise, L., & Garcia-Moreno, C. (2002). Violence by intimate partners. In E. G. Krug, L. L. Dahlberg, J. A. Mercy, A. G. Zwi, & R. Lozano (Eds.), World report on violence and health (pp. 87-121). Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization (WHO).
15.
Holder, Y., Peden, M., Krug, E., Lund, J., Gururaj, G., & Kobusingye, O. (Eds.). (2001). Injury surveillance guidelines. Geneva, Switzerland: WHO.
16.
Joint Commission on the Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations. (1996). Comprehensive accreditation manual for hospitals. Oakbrook Terrace, IL: Author.
17.
Kilpatrick, D. G., Edmunds, C. M., & Seymour, A. K. (1992). Rape in America: A report to the nation. Arlington, VA: National Victim Center and the Crime Victims Research and Treatment Center.
18.
Lang, J. L. (2002). Introduction. In A. Greig (Ed.), Partners in change: Working with men to end gender-based violence (pp. 1-9). Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic: United Nations International Research and Training Institute for the Advancement of Women.
19.
Lynch, J. L. (1996). Clarifying divergent estimates of rape from two national surveys. Public Opinion Quarterly, 60, 410-430.
20.
National Center for Injury Prevention and Control. (2002). CDC injury research agenda. Atlanta, GA: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
21.
Rand, M. R., & Saltzman, L. E. (2003). The nature and extent of recurring intimate partner violence against women in the United States. Journal of Comparative Family Studies, 34, 137-149.
22.
Rennison, C. (2002). Criminal victimization 2001. Changes 2000-01with trends 1993-2001 (NCJ 194610). Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice Statistics.
23.
Rennison, C. (2003). Intimate partner violence, 1993-2001 (NCJ 197838). Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice Statistics.
24.
Saltzman, L. E., Fanslow, J. L., McMahon, P. M., & Shelley, G. A. (1999). Intimate partner violence surveillance: Uniform definitions and recommended data elements (version 1.0). Atlanta, GA: CDC, National Center for Injury Prevention and Control.
25.
Saltzman, L. E., Green, Y. T., Marks, J. S., & Thacker, S. B. (2000). Violence against women as a public health issue: Comments from the CDC. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 19, 325-329.
26.
Saltzman, L. E., & Johnson, D. (1996). CDC’s Family and Intimate Violence Prevention Team: Basing programs on science. Journal of the American Medical Women’s Association, 51, 83-86.
27.
Saltzman, L. E., Mercy, J. A., & Rhodes, P. H. (1992). Identification of nonfatal family and intimate assault incidents in police data. American Journal of Public Health, 82, 1018-1020.
28.
Schwartz, M. D. (2000). Methodological issues in the use of survey data for measuring and characterizing violence against women. Violence Against Women, 6, 815-838.
29.
Simon, T. R., Anderson, M., Thompson, M. P., Crosby, A. E., Shelley, G., & Sacks, J. J. (2001). Attitudinal acceptance of intimate partner violence among U.S. adults. Violence and Victims, 16, 115-126.
30.
Straus, M. A. (1979). Measuring intrafamily conflict and violence: The Conflict Tactics (CT) scale. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 41, 75-88.
31.
Straus, M. A. (1999). The controversy over domestic violence by women. A methodological, theoretical, and sociology of science analysis. In X. B. Arriaga & S. Oskamp (Eds.), Violence in intimate relationships (pp. 17-44). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
32.
Thacker, S. B. (2000). Historical development. In S. M. Teutsch & R. E. Churchill (Eds.), Principles and practice of public health surveillance (2nd ed., pp. 1-16). New York: Oxford University Press.
33.
Thacker, S. B., & Berkelman, R. L. (1988). Public health surveillance in the United States. Epidemiologic Reviews, 10, 164-190.
34.
The nation’s two crime measures. Fact sheet (NCJ 122795). (n.d.) Retrieved October 23, 2003, from the U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics Web site: http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/pdf/ntcm.pdf
35.
Tjaden, P., & Thoennes, N. (2000a). Extent, nature and consequences of intimate partner violence. Findings from the National Violence Against Women Survey (NCJ 181867). Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice.
36.
Tjaden, P., & Thoennes, N. (2000b). Full report of the prevalence, incidence, and consequences of violence against women. Findings from the National Violence Against Women Survey (NCJ 183781). Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice.
37.
Velzeboer, M., Ellsberg, M., Clavel Arcas, C., & Garcia-Moreno, C. (2003) Violence against women: The health sector responds. Washington, DC: Pan American Health Organization.
38.
World Health Organization. (1992). International statistical classification of diseases and related health problems (10th rev. Vol. 1) (ICD-10). Geneva, Switzerland: Author.
