violence outcome data, although many studies included pre-COVID- related restrictions data from the prior year or years (i.e., pre-2020) (Bullinger et al., 2020; Campedelli et al., 2021; de la Miyar et al., 2021; Evans et al., 2021; Gerell et al., 2021; Gosangi et al., 2021; McLay, 2021; Nix & Richards, 2021; Payne & Morgan, 2020; Perez-Vincent et al., 2020; Ravindran & Shah, 2020; Rhodes et al., 2021).2b reports these same results but for only the US-based studies and the result %-change in domestic violence indicates that the average of 31 positive and negative
3 The study estimates out-number the number of included studies as some of the studies provided a range (low/high) of estimates (for example, Bullinger et al., 2020) and some studies reported estimates separately for different lo- cations/jurisdictions (for example, Ashby, 2020; Nix & Richards, 2021).2a graphically illustrates the range of the study-specific esti- mates of the percentage decrease/increase in domestic violence that occurred following the emergence of the COVID-19 pandemic and post- COVID-19-related restrictions relative to domestic violence that was documented prior to the COVID-19 pandemic and post-COVID-19- related restrictions.In the final stage of the analysis, effect sizes were generated for those included studies that reported sufficient information for an effect size to be calculated, which is not always the case when collating studies to include for meta-analyses.According to the 37 %-change estimates available from the 18 included studies,3 eight of the study estimates reported a decrease in domestic violence (range = - 0.28% to - 77.0%) compared to the 29 study estimates that reported an increase in domestic violence during the post-COVID-19 pandemic's emergence and post-COVID-19- related restrictions (range = +0.60% to +75.0%).Fig.Fig.Fig.