Prevalence, associated factors, and association of intimate partner violence and suicidal behaviors among women of reproductive age in Asia: Protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis of cross-sectional studies.

Skip to main content An official website of the United States government Here's how you know Here's how you know Official websites use .gov A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States. Secure .gov websites use HTTPS A lock ( Lock Locked padlock icon ) or https:// means you've safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites. Search Log in Dashboard Publications Account settings Log out Search… Search NCBI Primary site navigation Search Logged in as: Dashboard Publications Account settings Log in Search PMC Full-Text Archive Search in PMC Journal List User Guide PERMALINK Copy As a library, NLM provides access to scientific literature. Inclusion in an NLM database does not imply endorsement of, or agreement with, the contents by NLM or the National Institutes of Health. Learn more: PMC Disclaimer | PMC Copyright Notice PLoS One . 2026 Apr 10;21(4):e0338752. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0338752 Search in PMC Search in PubMed View in NLM Catalog Add to search Prevalence, associated factors, and association of intimate partner violence and suicidal behaviors among women of reproductive age in Asia: Protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis of cross-sectional studies Mantaka Rahman Mantaka Rahman 1 International Centre for Diarrheal Disease Research, Bangladesh (icddr, b), Dhaka, Bangladesh 2 National Institute of Preventive and Social Medicine (NIPSOM), Dhaka, Bangladesh Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis, Visualization, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing Find articles by Mantaka Rahman 1, 2, * , Habiba Kabir Habiba Kabir 3 Bangladesh Medical University (BMU), Dhaka, Bangladesh Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing, Data curation Find articles by Habiba Kabir 3 , Anika Naowar Chowdhury Anika Naowar Chowdhury 2 National Institute of Preventive and Social Medicine (NIPSOM), Dhaka, Bangladesh Data curation, Formal analysis, Writing – review & editing Find articles by Anika Naowar Chowdhury 2 , Md Babu Raihan Mia Md Babu Raihan Mia 2 National Institute of Preventive and Social Medicine (NIPSOM), Dhaka, Bangladesh Data curation, Writing – review & editing Find articles by Md Babu Raihan Mia 2 , Tamal Saha Tamal Saha 1 International Centre for Diarrheal Disease Research, Bangladesh (icddr, b), Dhaka, Bangladesh Data curation, Writing – review & editing Find articles by Tamal Saha 1 , Afroza Tamanna Shimu Afroza Tamanna Shimu 4 Dhaka Medical College and Hospital, Dhaka, Bangladesh Investigation, Visualization, Writing – review & editing Find articles by Afroza Tamanna Shimu 4 , Ummul Khair Alam Ummul Khair Alam 2 National Institute of Preventive and Social Medicine (NIPSOM), Dhaka, Bangladesh Writing – review & editing, Supervision Find articles by Ummul Khair Alam 2 Editor: Saeed Ahmad 5 Author information Article notes Copyright and License information 1 International Centre for Diarrheal Disease Research, Bangladesh (icddr, b), Dhaka, Bangladesh 2 National Institute of Preventive and Social Medicine (NIPSOM), Dhaka, Bangladesh 3 Bangladesh Medical University (BMU), Dhaka, Bangladesh 4 Dhaka Medical College and Hospital, Dhaka, Bangladesh 5 Utah State University, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ✉ * E-mail: [email protected] Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist. Roles Mantaka Rahman : Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis, Visualization, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing Habiba Kabir : Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing, Data curation Anika Naowar Chowdhury : Data curation, Formal analysis, Writing – review & editing Md Babu Raihan Mia : Data curation, Writing – review & editing Tamal Saha : Data curation, Writing – review & editing Afroza Tamanna Shimu : Investigation, Visualization, Writing – review & editing Ummul Khair Alam : Writing – review & editing, Supervision Saeed Ahmad : Editor Received 2025 Nov 26; Accepted 2026 Mar 24; Collection date 2026. © 2026 Rahman et al This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. PMC Copyright notice PMCID: PMC13068250  PMID: 41961833 Abstract Intimate partner violence (IPV) is strongly linked to suicidal behaviors (ideation, plans, attempts), affecting 1 in 3 women globally, with prevalence varying across regions. Sociocultural and economic factors shape IPV and SB risk differently. This review will estimate prevalence, risk factors, and associations of IPV and SBs among women of reproductive age in Asia to provide region-specific evidence for targeted interventions. We will systematically search PubMed, Scopus, PsycINFO, Web of Science, EMBASE, CINAHL, and Google Scholar for studies published up to 30 November 2025, following PRISMA guidelines. The search will also include grey literature and citation chaining, using keyword truncation, string searches, and standardized indexing terms. Cross-sectional observational studies among Asian women (19–45 years) exposed to intimate partner violence (physical, psychological, sexual) will be included, reporting suicidal behaviors (ideation, plans, attempts) compared with unexposed women. Only English-language, peer-reviewed studies will be considered, while reviews, abstracts, and unpublished studies will be excluded. Two independent reviewers will screen studies for the central concepts of “Intimate Partner Violence (IPV)” and “Suicidal Behaviors (SB)”, with disagreements resolved by a third reviewer. Data on prevalence, associated factors, mediator variables, and numerical estimates of IPV–SB associations will be extracted. Meta-analysis using a random-effects model will be conducted alongside a narrative synthesis. Findings will be visualized with forest and funnel plots, heterogeneity assessed using the Q Cochrane statistic and I² index, and subgroup and sensitivity analyses performed. Risk of bias will be evaluated using the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Critical Appraisal Checklist. Early identification of psychological distress using culturally validated tools, combined with understanding context-specific drivers of IPV, is essential for preventing suicidal behaviors among Asian women of reproductive age. Findings from this review will inform targeted interventions, guide policy, and address gender norms that perpetuate violence and elevate mental health risks. Introduction Global evidence indicates a strong link between intimate partner violence (IPV) and suicidal behavior (SBs), including suicidal ideation (SI), plans (SP), and attempts (SA). Suicidal behaviors comprising thoughts, plans, and non-fatal self-directed actions with the intent to die is a major contributor to morbidity and mortality worldwide [ 1 ]. IPV, a common form of interpersonal violence and a significant public health concern, affects nearly one in three women globally over their lifetime [ 2 ]. IPV and suicide mortality often co-occur globally; therefore, individuals presenting with suicidal distress or following self-harm should be routinely assessed for IPV [ 3 ]. A recent English study reported that 49.7% of past-year suicide attempters had ever experienced IPV, with past-year IPV at 23.1%, both linked to higher odds of self-harm (OR 2.20) and suicidal thoughts (OR 1.85) [ 3 ]. Most notably, half of the global burden of female suicides is concentrated within the 11 WHO South-East Asia Region countries, driven by sociocultural factors, societal norms, stigma, and male-dominated structures [ 4 ]. Despite the exceptionally high burden of suicide morbidity and mortality in the WHO South-East Asia Region, evidence on its risk factors is limited, and underreporting likely leads to underestimation of the true figures [ 1 , 4 ].Global evidences have documented regional variation in women’s IPV and suicidal behaviors: Asia (IPV 21–35%, SB attempts 4–5%, ideation 14%) [ 2 ], Europe (IPV 16–23%, SB attempts 11–12%, ideation 13–16%) [ 5 ], Americas (IPV 25%, SB 6.7–8%), Australia (IPV ~ 23%, SB attempts 5–6%), and Africa (IPV 40–44%, SB attempts 11–12%, ideation >20%) [ 5 , 6 ] ( Fig 1 ). Additionally, another concerning finding is that nearly 56% of female suicides and 40% of male suicides occur in individuals under 30 years of age particularly in low-and-middle income countries (LMICs) [ 4 ]. A recent meta-analysis reported a moderate, direct association between IPV (primarily physical and sexual) and suicidal outcomes, with IPV survivors having 3–5 times higher odds of suicidality [ 7 ]. Fig 1. Regional clusters of IPV, SB (suicidal attempts, and suicidal ideation) among women. Open in a new tab The illustrative background was adapted from prior literature to display regional prevalence across Asia, Europe, the Americas, Australia, and Africa, using a color gradient ranging from 0% to 50% to represent varying prevalence levels across regions. The triggering factors for IPV and suicidality vary across countries, influenced by sociocultural, economic, and legal contexts. While a study from Asian countries identified post-conflict settings, shifting gender roles, economic stress, and psychosocial factors as key drivers of IPV and suicidal behavior among women [ 8 ], in Europe psychological (IPV mostly abuse experience and economic) IPV have been strongly linked to suicidal ideation [ 9 ], and in sub‑Saharan Africa, controlling behavior is deeply rooted in poverty, alcohol use, and patriarchal norms and is associated with both IPV and increased mental health risk including suicidality [ 10 ]. The cultural, interpersonal, and practical barriers are one of the major hurdles to care seek for IPV survivors causing psychological distress and further prawn to SBs. Addressing root risk factors like economic stress, social norms, and trauma through evidence-based IPV prevention interventions could reduce IPV by about 15% or more, which may in turn lower SB risk [ 11 ]. Despite growing evidence linking IPV to adverse mental health outcomes, the specific contribution of IPV to SBs including as ideation, planning, and attempts among women of reproductive age (15–49 years) remains unclear [ 8 ]. Existing reviews have often examined IPV broadly in relation to multiple mental health outcomes, without isolating suicidal behaviors or differentiating the impacts of physical, sexual, and psychological IPV. As a result, opportunities to identify and target a key modifiable risk factor for female suicidality had been missed. Furthermore, a recent meta-analysis [ 7 , 12 ] had estimated the association of IPV and SBs while the present systematic review protocol is completely apart from the reporting by focusing specifically on women of reproductive age in Asia, estimating the prevalence of IPV, and suicidal behaviors (SI, SA, SP), and identifying association, and associated risk factors, using only cross-sectional studies to provide region-specific, comparable evidences. This focused approach will provide actionable documentation to inform targeted, culturally adaptive interventions and policies for suicide prevention in Asian women. Materials and methods Study objectives and research question The primary objective of this study will be to investigate the association between IPV and suicidal behaviors (suicidal ideation, suicidal plan, and suicidal attempts) among Asian women of reproductive age groups. The secondary objective will be to find the pooled prevalence of IPV and SB across the group in Asia and explore the possible associated factors. There will be two research questions: (1) What is the pooled prevalence of IPV and SB among women aged 15–49 years in Asia? (2) What is the association between exposure to IPV and suicidal ideation, suicidal plan, and suicidal attempts among women of reproductive age in Asia? Study methods Design and registration. The study protocol has been prospectively registered in International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO), [ 13 ] under the unique registration number CRD420251238459 (URL: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/recorddashboard).This review will adhere to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA 2015) [ 14 ] and Meta-Analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) [ 15 ] guidelines. Search strategy A comprehensive search strategy, incorporating Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) terms will be adopted to extract relevant literature from specified electronic databases, and citation chaining of grey literature. A number of databases, including PubMed (MEDLINE), Scopus (Elsevier), PsycINFO (APA PsycNet), Web of Science (Clarivate Analytics), EMBASE (Elsevier), CINAHL (EBSCOhost), and Google Scholar (Google), will be accessed up until November 30, 2025. The search strategy will include two central concepts of “Intimate Partner Violence (IPV) " and “Suicidal Behaviors (SB)” among Asian women. The searched keywords, detailed screening process, and PEO criteria (Participants, Exposure, and Outcome) are depicted in PRISMA 2020 Flowchart [ 16 ] ( Fig 2 ). Only studies published in English-language in internationally peer-reviewed journals reporting observational cross-sectional studies will be included. In addition, women who have not experienced domestic violence, will also serve as a comparison group to identify differences with the women who were victimized by IPV. Fig 2. PRISMA flow diagram for systematic review and meta-analysis. Open in a new tab The flowchart illustrates the study identification, screening, assessment, and inclusion process at each stage, with full-text articles subsequently considered for meta-analysis, narrative synthesis, and association assessment. Eligibility criteria Based on the PEO components, the eligibility criteria for the review will be as such: P (Population): Women (19–45 years) of Asian countries who have experienced domestic violence perpetrated by an intimate partner, representing different socio-cultural contexts and varying degrees of abuse. E (Exposure): The multifaceted impacts of domestic violence, including both direct and indirect effects arising from emotional, physical, psychological, and sexual abuse. O (Outcome): The elevated risk of suicidal behaviours, encompassing SI, SP, and SA, among women who have experienced domestic violence compared with those unexposed. Study selection process The primary (title and abstracts), and secondary (full-text) screening of all retrieved studies will be assessed by two independent reviewers based on the predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria. The relevant studies will be finally included for meta-analysis. Any disagreements regarding the eligibility of a study will be discussed and resolved through consensus. Outcomes (primary and secondary) The primary and secondary outcome of the study will be to assess the strength of association and pooled prevalence of IPV and SB including SI, SA, and SP respectively among women in Asia. In addition, the study will also include exploration of heterogeneity and potential sources of variation. as well as, identification of associated factors, and moderator variables influencing the association between IPV and SB Table 1 . Table 1. Example search strategy for pubmed database (CoCoPoP Framework). Search Element Search Terms and Structure Condition (Co) (“Intimate Partner Violence*”[MeSH] OR “Domestic Violence”[MeSH] OR “Spouse Abuse”[MeSH] OR “intimate partner violence”[Title/Abstract] OR “domestic violence”[Title/Abstract] OR “spousal abuse”[Title/Abstract] OR “partner violence”[Title/Abstract] OR “partner abuse”[Title/Abstract] OR “spouse abuse”[Title/Abstract] OR “wife beating”[Title/Abstract] OR “battered woman”[Title/Abstract]) (“Suicide”[MeSH] OR “Suicidal behaviour*”[MeSH] OR “Suicide, Attempted”[MeSH] OR “Self-Injurious Behavior”[MeSH] OR “suicidal ideation”[Title/Abstract] OR “suicide ideation”[Title/Abstract] OR “suicide attempt”[Title/Abstract] OR “attempted suicide”[Title/Abstract] OR “self-harm”[Title/Abstract] OR “self-harm”[Title/Abstract] OR “self-injury”[Title/Abstract] OR “self injur*”[Title/Abstract]) (“risk factors”[Title/Abstract] OR “associated factors”[Title/Abstract] OR “determinants”[Title/Abstract] OR “predictors”[Title/Abstract] OR “correlates”[Title/Abstract] OR “contributors”[Title/Abstract] OR “protective factors”[Title/Abstract] OR “modifiable factors”[Title/Abstract] OR “non-modifiable factors”[Title/Abstract]) Population (P) (“Female”[MeSH] OR female*[Title/Abstract] OR woman [Title/Abstract] OR women [Title/Abstract] OR “women of reproductive age”[Title/Abstract] OR “reproductive-age women”[Title/Abstract] OR “reproductive age”[Title/Abstract] OR “15–49”[Title/Abstract]) Context (Co) (“Asia*”[MeSH] OR Asia[Title/Abstract] OR “South Asia*”[Title/Abstract] OR “Southeast Asia*”[Title/Abstract] OR “East Asia*”[Title/Abstract] OR “Western Asia*”[Title/Abstract] OR “Central Asia*”[Title/Abstract] OR Afghanistan[Title/Abstract] OR Bangladesh[Title/Abstract] OR Bhutan[Title/Abstract] OR India[Title/Abstract] OR Pakistan[Title/Abstract] OR Nepal[Title/Abstract] OR “Sri Lanka”[Title/Abstract] OR Maldives[Title/Abstract] OR China[Title/Abstract] OR Japan[Title/Abstract] OR Korea[Title/Abstract] OR “South Korea”[Title/Abstract] OR “North Korea”[Title/Abstract] OR Mongolia[Title/Abstract] OR Taiwan[Title/Abstract] OR Kazakhstan[Title/Abstract] OR Kyrgyzstan[Title/Abstract] OR Tajikistan[Title/Abstract] OR Turkmenistan[Title/Abstract] OR Uzbekistan[Title/Abstract] OR Indonesia[Title/Abstract] OR Malaysia[Title/Abstract] OR Philippines[Title/Abstract] OR Singapore[Title/Abstract] OR Thailand[Title/Abstract] OR Vietnam[Title/Abstract] OR Laos[Title/Abstract] OR Cambodia[Title/Abstract] OR Myanmar[Title/Abstract] OR Brunei[Title/Abstract] OR “Timor-Leste”[Title/Abstract]) Open in a new tab a CoCoPoP = Condition (Co); Context (Co) and Population (Po) b MeSH = Medical Subject Headings Boolean operators (AND, OR, NOT), truncations, and filters (free full texts, keywords) will be applied to refine the search results. Methodological quality assessment The methodological quality of the finally included studies will be evaluated using the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) critical appraisal checklists for Analytical Cross-Sectional Studies. Only cross-sectional studies will be included, as this design will provide direct and comparable estimates of prevalence and associated factors at a defined time point, ensuring methodological consistency and reducing heterogeneity across the included studies. The JBI checklist comprises eight items covering key domains such as sampling adequacy, measurement reliability, confounding control, and statistical analysis. Each item will be rated as “Yes” (1 point), “No” (0 point), “Unclear”, or “Not applicable.” A total score will be calculated for each study selection, with a maximum possible score of 8. Based on the overall score, studies will be classified as follows: High quality (low RoB): 6–8 points, Moderate quality (moderate RoB): 4–5 points, low quality (high RoB): ≤ 3 points. Two reviewers will independently perform the appraisal, and disagreements will be evaluated through consensus or by consulting a third reviewer. The influence of methodological quality on pooled estimates and effect sizes will be explored through subgroup or sensitivity analysis. Study selection and data management The EndNote™ 21.0 reference management software (Clarivate Analytics, Philadelphia, USA) will be used to organize all articles retrieved from the database searches. Search results will be imported into EndNote when necessary, where duplicate records will be identified and removed. Additionally, any studies selected through manual or reference list searches (citation chaining) will be added to the EndNote library as needed. After de-duplication, the remaining records will be exported to Rayyan QCRI, a web-based systematic review management platform, to facilitate independent screening of titles and abstracts by two reviewers and to ensure efficient collaboration throughout the study selection and review process. Data extraction Data extraction will be conducted by two independent reviewers using a pre-tested and uniform Google Excel form. The reviewers will independently conduct study screening, quality assessment, and data extraction. Any disagreements will be verified through discussion and consensus in consultation with a third reviewer. The extraction form will include author and study details (study design, sampling technique, sample size, year of study, data collection method), geographic location, income level, demographic detail details (e.g., age range, gender, marital status), measures for assessing IPV, suicidal behaviors (SI, SP, SA), time frame for considering suicidal behaviors (lifetime, past year etc.). In addition, the associated factors both risk and protective factors of IPV and SB will be extracted, while mediator variables influencing the IPV–SB relationship will also be captured when available. All numerical outcomes reported in the included studies such as correlation coefficients, odds ratios, prevalence estimates, mean differences, and standardized mean differences will be extracted for meta-analysis along with their confidence intervals when available. Primary effect measures will be taken as reported from included studies. When information is incomplete (e.g., missing standard errors, confidence intervals), effect sizes will be calculated using established conversion formulas [ 17 ] or extrapolated from available statistics such as p -values, test statistics, or sample sizes. Data synthesis and statistical analysis For quantitate synthesis, a random effect model meta-analysis (REML) will be conducted using R studio v.4.3.2 “meta” packages. As the included studies are expected to derive from diverse settings, and background with high heterogeneity a REML model will be adopted to account for both within and between study variance. Statistical heterogeneity will be assessed using the Q statistic, and its degree was estimated using the I 2 statistic. Range of I 2 heterogeneity will be interpreted as either mild ( I 2 < 25%), moderate (50% < I 2 < 25%), and severe or high severe ( I 2 > 75%), with REML applied for when I 2 > 50% [ 18 ] ( Fig 3 ). In addition, a random-effects model (REM) using restricted maximum likelihood (REML) will be applied. Furthermore, subgroup analysis and sensitivity analysis will be conducted to explore potential sources of heterogeneity. Fig 3. Advanced Interpretation of I² Heterogeneity and Model Selection. Open in a new tab This figure illustrates the interpretation ranges of I² heterogeneity mild (0–25%), moderate (25–50%), substantial (50–75%), and severe (75–100%), and guides the choice between Fixed-Effect and Random-Effects (REML) models based on Cochrane recommendations. The included studies are expected to report associations between IPV, suicidal behaviours using different effect measures. For the meta-analysis, Pearson’s correlation coefficient will be used as the common effect size. Other reported measures including standardized mean differences, odds ratios, and standardized beta coefficients will be converted to Pearson’s correlation coefficients (r s ) using established conversion formulas [ 17 ]. To address the potential instability of variance in Pearson’s r, correlation coefficients will be converted to Fisher’s z-scores using the formula z = 0.5×[ln⁡(1 + r)−ln⁡(1 − r)] [ 19 ]. All analyses will use Fisher’s z as the effect size with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Effect sizes will be interpreted as small (0.1), moderate (0.3), or large (0.5) 17 . Pooled prevalence of IPV and suicidal behaviors (SI, SA, SP) will be visualized using forest plot across the studies reporting prevalence estimates ( Fig 4A ). Publication bias will be evaluated using funnel plots and Egger’s test when ≥10 studies will be included, if <10 studies, publication bias will not be formally tested due to low statistical power. Furthermore, sensitivity analysis will be performed using the jack-knife method to assess the robustness of the pooled estimates and determine whether any single study disproportionately influences the overall pooled estimated results [ 20 ] ( Fig 4B ). These analyses will be limited to associations between overall IPV and suicidal behaviors, as at least ten studies are required per group. Associated factors related to IPV and SB will be extracted and narratively synthesized due to variability in measurement across studies. Where sufficient data will be available, subgroup analyses (region, type of IPV, timeframe) will be performed to explore potential sources of heterogeneity across studies. Potential moderators of the IPV–SB relationship will also be summarized descriptively. Moderator effects will be explored via subgroup analysis (study setting, income settings, marital status, population characteristics, measurement tools, and geographic region), and meta-regression to examine potential sources of heterogeneity. Fig 4. Forest Plot and Jackknife Sensitivity Analysis of Pooled Fisher’s z Estimates. Open in a new tab Panel A presents the forest plot showing individual study Fisher’s z values with 95% confidence intervals and the pooled correlation estimate (r  =  0.xx). Panel B shows the jackknife sensitivity analysis assessing the robustness of the pooled estimate by sequentially removing each study. Ethics statements As the study is based on a review of secondary data, and thus, it does not require any formal ethical approval. Patient and public involvement The study protocol does not involve direct or indirect participation of patients or members of the public. The status and timeline of the study The primary screening (title and abstract) is expected to be completed by November 2025, with data extraction anticipated to be completed within February 2026. Final analysis and reporting are projected to be completed within August, 2026. Any deviations from the planned timeline or protocol will be clearly documented in the final manuscript. Discussion The systematic review and meta-analysis will extract the available evidences across 48 Asian countries to investigate the prevalence, association, and related factors of IPV and SB among the women of reproductive age. Prior studies have reported that globally, one in three women experiences IPV, including physical and/or sexual violence, during their lifetime. The prevalence varies by region: 22% in high-income countries, 31% in the Eastern Mediterranean, and 33% in Africa and South-East Asia. The World Health Organization (WHO) has identified gender inequality and societal norms that tolerate violence against women as the root causes of IPV worldwide [ 2 ]. The violence has both short- and long-term health consequences including physical, mental, sexual and reproductive health events. It has been reported women with IPV (mostly physical and sexually abused) were 1.5 times higher risk of sexually transmitted diseases (STDs) and 41% more likely to have pre-term birth as long-term consequences [ 2 , 7 ]. The economic and social burden of IPV is substantial nearly the lifetime cost ~ $103,767 per female among the US adults [ 21 ]. Furthermore, studies have investigated IPV as the precursor of suicide (6.1%) particularly among the young adults globally. A study using the US National Violent Death Reporting System (2014–2018) reported that most IPV-related suicides involved male perpetrators, while younger female victims were more often affected by physical abuse and males by psychological abuse [ 22 ]. Region-specific evidence is recommended because cultural norms, reporting patterns, and support systems differ across settings, requiring IPV prevention and response strategies to be tailored to local contexts. Strengths and limitations The study will aim to evaluate and integrate findings from observational cross-sectional studies following standard guidelines and corresponding checklists. While heterogeneity among included studies may pose challenges for meta-analysis and pooled estimates. Secondly, reliance on cross-sectional data may precludes establishing causality, leaving open the possibility that suicidal behavior might precede or cooccur with IPV in complex bidirectional relationships. Furthermore, underreporting of IPV or suicidal behaviors, particularly in regions with strong stigma, may have underestimated the true association. Ethics and dissemination of results and publication policy This study synthesizes evidence solely from previously published available research and therefore does not require ethical approval form any review board, as no primary data will be collected. The protocol documents are included within the manuscript and as S1 Table . Further data could be requested from the authors. Upon completion, key findings will be disseminated through national and international conferences, webinars, and other academic platforms. Additionally, tailored summaries will be shared with policymakers (government ministries and departments), clinicians (emergency medicine specialist, psychiatrists, psychologists, gynecologists), non-governmental organizations (NGOs), and other stakeholders such as law enforcement and legal services, medical universities, community and advocacy groups, international development partners, and the education ministry to inform practice, guide future research, and support intervention planning. Potential impact LMICs including Asian countries had been reported higher prevalence of IPV (27%) and its sub-types including physical (23%), sexual (9.5%), and emotional violence (12.5%) [ 23 ]. Prior studies had identified women in Asia were exposed to IPV had higher risk of SB due to several socio-cultural, psychological, and mental disorders including depression, anxiety, and post-traumatic stress. However, early screening for psychological distress using culturally validated assessment tools may serve as an essential strategy for preventing SB among Asian victims of violence. In addition, examining the underlying drivers of IPV and comparing these patterns with global evidence will help identify context-specific factors, and gender norms that sustain violence and elevate mental health risks. Supporting information S1 Table. Search strings for different pre-defined databases (PubMed, Scopus, PsycINFO, Web of Science, EMBASE, CINAHL, and Google Scholar). (DOCX) pone.0338752.s001.docx (14.3KB, docx) S1 File. PRISMA-P Checklist 2025. (DOCX) pone.0338752.s002.docx (21.1KB, docx) Acknowledgments The authors sincerely acknowledge each affiliated author’s institution specially iccdr,b, Dhaka, Bangladesh, through which the databases library could be accessible. Abbreviations: IPV Intimate Partner Violance SB Suicidal Behaviors PRISMA Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses MOOSE Meta-Analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology Data Availability All study related data including search strings, and relevant data is attached with the manuscript as a supplementary file. Data will be made available publicly on Kaggle when the study will be completed and published. Funding Statement The author(s) received no specific funding for this work. References 1. Jiwatram-Negrón T, Brooks MA, Ward M, Meinhart M. Systematic review of interventions to address suicidal behavior among people with a history of intimate partner violence: Promises and gaps across the globe. Aggression and Violent Behavior. 2023;73:101871. doi: 10.1016/j.avb.2023.101871 [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ] 2. World Health Organization WHO. WHO: Violence against women. 2024. [ Google Scholar ] 3. McManus S, Walby S, Barbosa EC, Appleby L, Brugha T, Bebbington PE, et al. Intimate partner violence, suicidality, and self-harm: a probability sample survey of the general population in England. Lancet Psychiatry. 2022;9(7):574–83. doi: 10.1016/S2215-0366(22)00151-1 [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ] 4. Fastenau A, Willis M, Penna S, Yaddanapudi L, Balaji M, Shidhaye R, et al. Risk Factors for Attempted Suicide and Suicide Death Among South-East Asian Women: A Scoping Review. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2024;21(12):1658. doi: 10.3390/ijerph21121658 [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ] 5. World Health Organization WHO. WHO: Violence Against Women Prevalence Estimates, 2018. World Health Organization; 2018. https://www.who.int [ Google Scholar ] 6. Sardinha L, Maheu-Giroux M, Stöckl H, Meyer SR, García-Moreno C. Global, regional, and national prevalence estimates of physical or sexual, or both, intimate partner violence against women in 2018. Lancet. 2022;399(10327):803–13. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(21)02664-7 [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ] 7. Alimoradi Z, Arabloo J, Jandaghian-Bidgoli M, Alizadeh S, Griffiths MD, Gorji HA, et al. The association between intimate partner violence and suicide ideation and attempts among women: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Affect Disord. 2026;394(Pt A):120511. doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2025.120511 [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ] 8. Bandara P, Page A, Rajapakse T, Knipe D. Intimate partner violence, suicide and self-harm in Sri Lanka: Analysis of national data. PLoS One. 2024;19(3):e0298413. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0298413 [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ] 9. Puig-Amores I, Cuadrado-Gordillo I, Martín-Mora-Parra G. Suicidal Behaviour as an Emerging Factor in Female Victims of Gender-Based Violence within a Relationship: An Exploratory Study. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022;19(22):15340. doi: 10.3390/ijerph192215340 [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ] 10. Ojogiwa OT, Sulaiman LA-R, Issah M. Factors influencing intimate partner controlling behaviour against rural women in South Africa. BMC Public Health. 2025;25(1):2797. doi: 10.1186/s12889-025-23856-0 [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ] 11. Alsina E, Browne JL, Gielkens D, Noorman MAJ, de Wit JBF. Interventions to Prevent Intimate Partner Violence: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Violence Against Women. 2024;30(3–4):953–80. doi: 10.1177/10778012231183660 [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ] 12. White SJ, Sin J, Sweeney A, Salisbury T, Wahlich C, Montesinos Guevara CM, et al. Global prevalence and mental health outcomes of intimate partner violence among women: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Trauma Violence Abuse. 2024;25(1):494–511. doi: 10.1177/15248380231155529 [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ] 13. Page MJ, Shamseer L, Tricco AC. Registration of systematic reviews in PROSPERO: 30,000 records and counting. Syst Rev. 2018;7(1):32. doi: 10.1186/s13643-018-0699-4 [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ] 14. Liberati A, Altman DG, Tetzlaff J, Mulrow C, Gøtzsche PC, Ioannidis JPA, et al. The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate healthcare interventions: explanation and elaboration. BMJ. 2009;339:b2700. doi: 10.1136/bmj.b2700 [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ] 15. Stroup DF, Berlin JA, Morton SC, Olkin I, Williamson GD, Rennie D, et al. Meta-analysis of observational studies in epidemiology: a proposal for reporting. Meta-analysis Of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) group. JAMA. 2000;283(15):2008–12. doi: 10.1001/jama.283.15.2008 [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ] 16. Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM. The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ. 2021;372. [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ] 17. Hoyt WT, Del Re AC. Effect size calculation in meta-analyses of psychotherapy outcome research. Psychother Res. 2018;28(3):379–88. doi: 10.1080/10503307.2017.1405171 [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ] 18. Wang Y, DelRocco N, Lin L. Comparisons of various estimates of the I2 statistic for quantifying between-study heterogeneity in meta-analysis. Stat Methods Med Res. 2024;33(5):745–64. doi: 10.1177/09622802241231496 [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ] 19. Borenstein M. Avoiding common mistakes in meta-analysis: Understanding the distinct roles of Q, I-squared, tau-squared, and the prediction interval in reporting heterogeneity. Res Synth Methods. 2024;15(2):354–68. doi: 10.1002/jrsm.1678 [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ] 20. Brush PL, Sherman M, Lambrechts MJ. Interpreting meta-analyses: a guide to funnel and forest plots. Clin Spine Surg. 2024;37(1):40–2. doi: 10.1097/bsd.0000000000001534 [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ] 21. Peterson C, Kearns MC, McIntosh WL, Estefan LF, Nicolaidis C, McCollister KE, et al. Lifetime Economic Burden of Intimate Partner Violence Among U.S. Adults. Am J Prev Med. 2018;55(4):433–44. doi: 10.1016/j.amepre.2018.04.049 [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ] 22. Graham LM, Kafka JM, AbiNader MA. Co-occurrence of Intimate Partner Violence and Suicide Mortality Among Adolescents and Young Adults in the United States. J Adolesc Health. 2025;76(2):283–90. doi: 10.1016/j.jadohealth.2024.09.019 [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ] 23. Zhu Y, He C, Bell M. Association of ambient temperature with the prevalence of intimate partner violence among partnered women in low- and middle-income South Asian countries. JAMA Psychiatry. 2023;80(9):952–61. doi: 10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2023.1958 [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ] PLoS One. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0338752.r001 Decision Letter 0 Saeed Ahmad Saeed Ahmad Academic Editor Find articles by Saeed Ahmad Author information Copyright and License information Roles Saeed Ahmad : Academic Editor © 2026 Saeed AhmadSaeed AhmadSaeed AhmadSaeed Ahmad This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited., which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited., which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited., which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. PMC Copyright notice 11 Mar 2026 Dear Dr. Rahman, Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process. Please submit your revised manuscript by Apr 25 2026 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at [email protected] . When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file. A letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'. A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'. An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'. If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter. If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols . Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at . Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at . Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at . Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols .... We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript. Kind regards, Saeed Ahmad Academic Editor PLOS One Journal Requirements: When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements. 1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf 2. When completing the data availability statement of the submission form, you indicated that you will make your data available on acceptance. We strongly recommend all authors decide on a data sharing plan before acceptance, as the process can be lengthy and hold up publication timelines. Please note that, though access restrictions are acceptable now, your entire data will need to be made freely accessible if your manuscript is accepted for publication. This policy applies to all data except where public deposition would breach compliance with the protocol approved by your research ethics board. If you are unable to adhere to our open data policy, please kindly revise your statement to explain your reasoning and we will seek the editor's input on an exemption. Please be assured that, once you have provided your new statement, the assessment of your exemption will not hold up the peer review process. 3. Please include captions for your Supporting Information files at the end of your manuscript, and update any in-text citations to match accordingly. Please see our Supporting Information guidelines for more information: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/supporting-information . 4.If the reviewer comments include a recommendation to cite specific previously published works, please review and evaluate these publications to determine whether they are relevant and should be cited. There is no requirement to cite these works unless the editor has indicated otherwise. [Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.] Reviewers' comments: Reviewer's Responses to Questions Comments to the Author 1. Does the manuscript provide a valid rationale for the proposed study, with clearly identified and justified research questions? Reviewer #1: Partly ********** 2. Is the protocol technically sound and planned in a manner that will lead to a meaningful outcome and allow testing the stated hypotheses??> Reviewer #1: Yes ********** 3. Is the methodology feasible and described in sufficient detail to allow the work to be replicable??> Reviewer #1: Yes ********** 4. Have the authors described where all data underlying the findings will be made available when the study is complete??> The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception, at the time of publication. The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception, at the time of publication. The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.--> Reviewer #1: Yes ********** 5. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English??> Reviewer #1: No ********** Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above and, if applicable, provide comments about issues authors must address before this protocol can be accepted for publication. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about research or publication ethics. You may also provide optional suggestions and comments to authors that they might find helpful in planning their study. Reviewer #1: Very interesting title: Despite it is current issues which need interventions, it is overlooked issues. Design and registration • Line 151: please provide the link Eligibility criteria • Line 167 : This is mixed method study and please use CoCoPo for prevalence which condition context and population, and PEO for exposure review and risk review population, exposure and outcome. compactor and s- study is not needed for this particular review. for study type you can describe under inclusion and exclusion criteria please cit PRISMA 2020 guideline Line 192: Table 1: Example Search Strategy for PubMed Database (PICOS Framework) • This is mixed method study and please use CoCoPo for prevalence which condition context and population, and PEO for exposure review and risk review population, exposure and outcome. compactor and s- study is not needed for this particular review. for study type you can describe under inclusion and exclusion criteria please cit PRISMA 2020 guideline Quality (risk of bias) assessment • Line 196: RoB is not JBI tool. it is Cochran tool. so, which tool do you plan to use JBI or Cochrane? • why only cross-sectional studies? Data management • line 197: Line 208: Do you mean study selection? Data management • Do you mean Data selection? Data extraction • Line 219: pretested or structured? which one do you thick better? • Line 221: what if not agree? Data synthesis and statistical analysis: • Line 240: what other methods? • Line 254: if the number of studies are >=10 • Line 2540: For what do you plan to perform sensitivity analysis • Line 261: what about subgroup analysis and publication bias analysis? Potential Impact Line 318 not necessary at this stage. you will address it latter ********** what does this mean? ). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files. If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public. Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy ..--> Reviewer #1: No ********** [NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.] To ensure your figures meet our technical requirements, please review our figure guidelines: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/figures You may also use PLOS’s free figure tool, NAAS, to help you prepare publication quality figures: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/figures#loc-tools-for-figure-preparation . NAAS will assess whether your figures meet our technical requirements by comparing each figure against our figure specifications. PLoS One. 2026 Apr 10;21(4):e0338752. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0338752.r002 Author response to Decision Letter 1 Article notes Copyright and License information Collection date 2026. PMC Copyright notice 13 Mar 2026 13th March, 2026. Dear Editor Saeed Ahmad Academic Editor PLOS One Subject: Revision submission for Manuscript (ID #PONE-D-25-62887) Dear Editor, Thank you for informing me the decision regarding my manuscript. I sincerely appreciate the reviewers’ time and constructive comments. After carefully reviewing the feedback, we firmly hope and believe that it will substantially improve the overall quality of the manuscript. The point by point response of reviewer comments are attached below. We hope the revised version would be strengthen scientifically and acceptable for publication in PLOS One. Thank you very much, and we are looking forward to hearing from you soon. On behalf of all the authors, Dr. Mantaka Rahman (Corresponding author) icddr,b Dhaka, Bangladesh. ----------------------------------------- RESPONSES TO THE REVIEWER 1 ------------------------------------------ 1. Reviewer’s Comment: Very interesting title: Despite it is current issues which need interventions, it is overlooked issues. Authors’ response: We thank the reviewer for his concern. The suggested point by point responses are attached below. 2. Reviewer’s Comment: Design and registration • Line 151: please provide the link Authors’ response: The link of the registration has been addressed accordingly (p6, Line 159). 3. Reviewer’s Comment: Eligibility criteria • Line 167: This is mixed method study and please use CoCoPo for prevalence which condition context and population, and PEO for exposure review and risk review population, exposure and outcome. compactor and s- study is not needed for this particular review. for study type you can describe under inclusion and exclusion criteria please cit PRISMA 2020 guideline Authors’ response: The suggested following changes have been incorporated accordingly. We have added CoCoPoP in the Table 1; incorporated PEO for the review by excluding comparator and study. Additionally, we have also cited PRISMA 2020 in Line 135 accordingly in the revised manuscript. 4. Reviewer’s Comment: Line 192: Table 1: Example Search Strategy for PubMed Database (PICOS Framework) • This is mixed method study and please use CoCoPo for prevalence which condition context and population, and PEO for exposure review and risk review population, exposure and outcome. compactor and s- study is not needed for this particular review. for study type you can describe under inclusion and exclusion criteria please cit PRISMA 2020 guideline Authors’ response: The suggested following changes have been incorporated accordingly in the following section. 5. Reviewer’s Comment: Quality (risk of bias) assessment • Line 196: RoB is not JBI tool. it is Cochran tool. so, which tool do you plan to use JBI or Cochrane? • why only cross-sectional studies? Data management • line 197: Line 208: Do you mean study selection? Authors’ response: We acknowledge reviewer concern. We do plan to use JBI tool to assess the quality of the included papers and thus revise the section accordingly. In addition, only cross-sectional studies will be included as they are the most appropriate design for estimating prevalence and associated factors in the target population (Line 168-170). In the data management section, we have revised the line for better clarification (p8, Line 188). 6. Reviewer’s Comment: Data management • Do you mean Data selection? Authors’ response: Yes, and the section heading has been revised accordingly. 7. Reviewer’s Comment: Data extraction • Line 219: pretested or structured? which one do you thick better? • Line 221: what if not agree? Authors’ response: In previous Line 219 we think pre-tested would be perfect to use and revised accordingly. We have clarified in the revised version that if the independent reviewer were not agreed, third reviewer will intervein and give a solution furthermore. 8. Reviewer’s Comment: Data synthesis and statistical analysis: • Line 240: what other methods? • Line 254: if the number of studies are >=10 • Line 2540: For what do you plan to perform sensitivity analysis • Line 261: what about subgroup analysis and publication bias analysis? Authors’ response: In previous line 240 we have added other methods like random-effect model and complemented by subgroup and sensitivity analysis to explore sources of heterogeneity. In previous line 254 we have added the reviewer suggested line accordingly. We have also clarified the reason for performing sensitivity analysis to find if any single study effect on the pooled estimated results or not. Lastly, we do add our plan to have subgroup and publication bias analysis (Funnel plot and egger’s test) in the revised manuscript accordingly (p9, Line 212-244). 9. Reviewer’s Comment: Potential Impact Line 318 not necessary at this stage. you will address it latter Authors’ response: The suggestion has been addressed accordingly in the revised version and the line has been removed. Thank you for your kind consideration. Attachment Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers_PLOS-2026_R1.docx pone.0338752.s003.docx (23.8KB, docx) PLoS One. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0338752.r003 Decision Letter 1 Saeed Ahmad Saeed Ahmad Academic Editor Find articles by Saeed Ahmad Author information Copyright and License information Roles Saeed Ahmad : Academic Editor © 2026 Saeed AhmadSaeed AhmadSaeed AhmadSaeed Ahmad This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited., which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited., which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited., which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. PMC Copyright notice 26 Mar 2026 Prevalence, Associated factors, and Association of Intimate Partner Violence and Suicidal Behaviors Among Women of Reproductive Age in Asia: Protocol for a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Cross-Sectional Studies PONE-D-25-62887R1 Dear Dr. Rahman, We’re pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it meets all outstanding technical requirements. Within one week, you’ll receive an e-mail detailing the required amendments. When these have been addressed, you’ll receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will be scheduled for publication. An invoice will be generated when your article is formally accepted. Please note, if your institution has a publishing partnership with PLOS and your article meets the relevant criteria, all or part of your publication costs will be covered. Please make sure your user information is up-to-date by logging into Editorial Manager at Editorial Manager® and clicking the ‘Update My Information' link at the top of the page. For questions related to billing, please contact  and clicking the ‘Update My Information' link at the top of the page. For questions related to billing, please contact  and clicking the ‘Update My Information' link at the top of the page. For questions related to billing, please contact  and clicking the ‘Update My Information' link at the top of the page. For questions related to billing, please contact billing support .... If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to help maximize its impact. If they’ll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team as soon as possible -- no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Kind regards, Saeed Ahmad, PhD Academic Editor PLOS One Additional Editor Comments (optional): Reviewers' comments: Reviewer's Responses to Questions Comments to the Author 1. Does the manuscript provide a valid rationale for the proposed study, with clearly identified and justified research questions? Reviewer #1: Yes ********** 2. Is the protocol technically sound and planned in a manner that will lead to a meaningful outcome and allow testing the stated hypotheses??> Reviewer #1: Yes ********** 3. Is the methodology feasible and described in sufficient detail to allow the work to be replicable??> Reviewer #1: Yes ********** 4. Have the authors described where all data underlying the findings will be made available when the study is complete??> The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception, at the time of publication. The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception, at the time of publication. The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.--> Reviewer #1: Yes ********** 5. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English??> Reviewer #1: Yes ********** Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above and, if applicable, provide comments about issues authors must address before this protocol can be accepted for publication. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about research or publication ethics. You may also provide optional suggestions and comments to authors that they might find helpful in planning their study. Reviewer #1: Great response. The authors address all comments.is can be accepted for publications in PLOS one Journal ********** what does this mean? ). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files. If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public. Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy ..--> Reviewer #1: No ********** PLoS One. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0338752.r004 Acceptance letter Saeed Ahmad Saeed Ahmad Academic Editor Find articles by Saeed Ahmad Author information Copyright and License information Roles Saeed Ahmad : Academic Editor © 2026 Saeed AhmadSaeed AhmadSaeed AhmadSaeed Ahmad This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited., which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited., which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited., which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. PMC Copyright notice PONE-D-25-62887R1 PLOS One Dear Dr. Rahman, I'm pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS One. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now being handed over to our production team. At this stage, our production department will prepare your paper for publication. This includes ensuring the following: * All references, tables, and figures are properly cited * All relevant supporting information is included in the manuscript submission, * There are no issues that prevent the paper from being properly typeset You will receive further instructions from the production team, including instructions on how to review your proof when it is ready. Please keep in mind that we are working through a large volume of accepted articles, so please give us a few days to review your paper and let you know the next and final steps. Lastly, if your institution or institutions have a press office, please let them know about your upcoming paper now to help maximize its impact. If they'll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team within the next 48 hours. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact [email protected]. You will receive an invoice from PLOS for your publication fee after your manuscript has reached the completed accept phase. If you receive an email requesting payment before acceptance or for any other service, this may be a phishing scheme. Learn how to identify phishing emails and protect your accounts at https://explore.plos.org/phishing . If we can help with anything else, please email us at [email protected]. Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE and supporting open access. Kind regards, PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff on behalf of Dr. Saeed Ahmad Academic Editor PLOS One Associated Data This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article. Supplementary Materials S1 Table. Search strings for different pre-defined databases (PubMed, Scopus, PsycINFO, Web of Science, EMBASE, CINAHL, and Google Scholar). (DOCX) pone.0338752.s001.docx (14.3KB, docx) S1 File. PRISMA-P Checklist 2025. (DOCX) pone.0338752.s002.docx (21.1KB, docx) Attachment Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers_PLOS-2026_R1.docx pone.0338752.s003.docx (23.8KB, docx) Data Availability Statement All study related data including search strings, and relevant data is attached with the manuscript as a supplementary file. Data will be made available publicly on Kaggle when the study will be completed and published. Articles from PLOS One are provided here courtesy of PLOS ACTIONS View on publisher site PDF (708.7 KB) Cite Collections Permalink PERMALINK Copy RESOURCES Similar articles Cited by other articles Links to NCBI Databases Cite Copy Download .nbib .nbib Format: AMA APA MLA NLM Add to Collections Create a new collection Add to an existing collection Name your collection * Choose a collection Unable to load your collection due to an error Please try again Add Cancel Follow NCBI NCBI on X (formerly known as Twitter) NCBI on Facebook NCBI on LinkedIn NCBI on GitHub NCBI RSS feed Connect with NLM NLM on X (formerly known as Twitter) NLM on Facebook NLM on YouTube National Library of Medicine 8600 Rockville Pike Bethesda, MD 20894 Web Policies FOIA HHS Vulnerability Disclosure Help Accessibility Careers NLM NIH HHS USA.gov Back to Top