Resumen de Intimate partner violence in lesbian, gay, transgender, men who have sex with men, women who have sex with women, and bisexual people: A systematic review and meta-analysis of prevalence

Juan Trujillo Guablocho, Cristian Mosquera Minaya, Gianfranco Centeno Terrazas

• Background: Intimate partner violence (IPV) in LGBT populations represents a major public health problem, and although research on the topic is increasing, knowledge remains limited, as current reviews have focused on specific populations. The prevalence of IPV in some studies reaches up to 48% in lesbian populations and 33% in MSM, while among transgender individuals, 37.5% have experienced physical violence and 25% sexual violence. Various factors aggravate the impact and make data collection more difficult.

  Objective: This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to synthesize the available evidence on the prevalence of intimate partner violence among lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender adults, considering the different forms of IPV and providing more precise estimates to inform future interventions and policies.

  Methods: Our study is a systematic review. We searched four specialized databases of scientific articles: Scopus, Web of Science, PsycINFO, and PubMed. We included studies where the population was adults 18 to 65 years of age, who are in a casual or formal same-sex or same-gender partner relationship. We included cross-sectional studies and baseline cohort study measurements. We used the JBI Systematic Reviews "Checklist for Prevalence Studies" tool to assess the risk of bias for each study. Our study was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42024529982).

  Results: Twenty-six studies met inclusion criteria; 17 were included in the meta-analysis, comprising 17,144 participants from various LGBT subgroups. The pooled prevalence was 29.5% (95% CI: 20.8%–39.0%), with high heterogeneity across studies (I² = 99.2%). Prevalence rates varied widely, especially among men who have sex with men (MSM) (8.1% to 54.5%) and transgender individuals (15.2% to 57.0%), highlighting significant variability depending on the subpopulation analyzed.

  Conclusions: Our study concluded that IPV represents a significant global concern for both MSM and transgender individuals. Notably, psychological and emotional violence emerged as the most prevalent form of IPV in both groups. On the other hand, the need for more inclusive research that reflects diverse cultural and social contexts is highlighted.