Historical Evolution and Global Strategies in Intimate Partner Violence Research and Intervention

Over the past five decades, IPV research has moved from being framed largely as a private or “domestic” matter to being recognized as a public health and human rights priority with measurable population-level consequences. Early scholarship focused on documenting prevalence and injuries; subsequent work expanded to mental health, reproductive outcomes, intergenerational effects, and the social determinants that sustain risk. In parallel, methods evolved from clinic- or police-based case series to population surveys, longitudinal cohorts, mixed-methods designs, and more nuanced measurement of coercive control, psychological violence, and technology-facilitated abuse. Conceptual models also broadened: feminist and power-based perspectives were increasingly complemented by ecological and life-course frameworks that connect individual risk with relationship dynamics, community conditions, and structural inequities. Intervention strategies have similarly matured, from crisis response and shelter models to health-system integration, perpetrator-focused approaches, and prevention programs that target norms, economic stressors, and gender inequality. Yet global evidence remains uneven, with persistent gaps in comparability, implementation, and policy translation across settings.This Research Topic aims to synthesize how IPV research and intervention have developed over time and how that evolution has shaped contemporary global strategies to prevent and respond to IPV. The central problem is the continued gap between what is known to reduce IPV risk and what is implemented at scale, particularly in resource-constrained or crisis-affected contexts. We seek contributions that clarify which historical turning points, conceptual, methodological, or policy-driven; most improved the field’s ability to measure IPV, explain its drivers, and evaluate intervention effectiveness. A further goal is to identify transferable lessons for today’s priorities: equity-focused prevention, multi-sector coordination, ethical and safe research practice, and interventions that are both culturally grounded and scalable.Submissions should be empirically grounded, historically informed, and oriented toward actionable global strategy. We welcome quantitative, qualitative, mixed-methods, reviews, and implementation/policy analyses addressing (but not limited to) the following themes:• Key historical shifts in IPV definitions, measurement, and surveillance (including comparability across countries).• Evolution of theories explaining IPV (e.g., ecological, feminist/power, life-course, structural determinants).• Milestones in intervention design and evaluation (including what “worked,” for whom, and under what conditions).• Health-system responses and integration into primary care, sexual/reproductive health, mental health, and emergency services.• Multi-sector and legal/policy strategies, including governance, funding, and accountability mechanisms.• Equity and intersectionality: IPV in relation to migration, disability, race/ethnicity, LGBTQ+ populations, and poverty.• Implementation science, scalability, cost considerations, and ethical/safety innovations in IPV research. Topic editors: Masood Ali Shaikh Source: https://www.frontiersin.org/research-topics/78888/historical-evolution-and-global-strategies-in-intimate-partner-violence-research-and-intervention