CC BY
0
Получена: 07 Февраля 2025 / Принята: 14 Июня 2025 / Опубликована online: 30 Июня 2025
DOI 10.34689/SH.2025.27.3.007 УДК 614.2:241.12(574.5)
0 ®
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
DOMESTIC VIOLENCE AS A PUBLIC HEALTH CHALLENGE: RESULTS OF A MASS SOCIOLOGICAL STUDY IN TURKISTAN REGION
Saltanat S. Kyrykbayeva*1, https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6151-6025 Aynash E. Oshibaeva1, https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5655-5465 Gulnaz O. Nuskabayeva1, https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2139-3221 Maiya V. Goremykina2, https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5433-7771 Nailya M. Urazalina2, https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0200-1763
1 Akhmet Yassawi International Kazakh-Turkish University, Turkestan, Republic of Kazakhstan;
2 NCJSC «Semey Medical University», Semey, Republic of Kazakhstan.
Introduction: Domestic violence is a significant public health concern, particularly in regions with persistent gender norms. In Kazakhstan, up-to-date regional data on the prevalence and perception of violence remain scarce.
Objective: To assess the prevalence, forms, and risk factors of domestic violence, levels of help-seeking behavior, and awareness of support services among the adult population in the Turkestan region.
Materials and methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted via an anonymous online survey with 24,621 adult participants. The questionnaire included sections on demographics, personal or family experience of violence, help-seeking behavior, awareness of legislation, and trust in institutional support. Data were analyzed using descriptive and comparative statistics (x2, p < 0.05).
Results: A total of 693 respondents (2.8%) reported domestic violence, mostly physical (48.2%) and psychological (43.7%). Only 1.1% contacted police services. Key barriers included fear (58.4%), shame (46.9%), and distrust in the system (34.1%). Women and rural residents were less likely to seek help. Nearly 95% of respondents supported prevention efforts.
Conclusions: Domestic violence remains highly underreported. Lack of institutional trust and cultural normalization of violence reduce help-seeking behavior. Locally tailored information, protection, and support programs are needed.
Keywords: domestic violence, public health, help-seeking, gender differences, Kazakhstan prevention.
Kyrykbayeva S.S., Oshibaeva A.E., Nuskabayeva G.O., Goremykina M.V., Urazalina N.M. Domestic Violence as a Public Health Challenge: Results of a Mass Sociological Study in Turkistan Region // Nauka i Zdravookhranenie [Science & Healthcare]. 2025. Vol.27 (3), pp. 64-69. doi 10.34689/SH.2025.27.3.007
ДОМАШНЕЕ НАСИЛИЕ КАК ВЫЗОВ ОБЩЕСТВЕННОМУ ЗДРАВООХРАНЕНИЮ: РЕЗУЛЬТАТЫ МАССОВОГО СОЦИОЛОГИЧЕСКОГО ИССЛЕДОВАНИЯ В ТУРКЕСТАНСКОЙ ОБЛАСТИ
Салтанат С. Кырыкбаева*1, https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6151-6025 Айнаш Е. Ошибаева1, https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5655-5465 Гульназ О. Нускабаева1, https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2139-3221 Майя В. Горемыкина2, https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5433-7771 Найля М. Уразалина2, https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0200-1763
1 Международный Казахско-Турецкий университет имени Ходжи Ахмеда Ясави, г. Туркестан, Республика Казахстан;
2 нАо «Медицинский университет Астаны», г. Астана, Республика Казахстан.
Введение: Домашнее насилие представляет собой значимую проблему общественного здравоохранения, особенно в регионах с традиционными тендерными установками. В Республике Казахстан отсутствуют актуальные данные о распространенности и восприятии насилия на региональном уровне.
Цель исследования: Оценить распространенность, формы и факторы риска домашнего насилия, уровень обращения за помощью и осведомлённости о службах поддержки среди взрослого населения Туркестанской области.
Abstract
For citation:
Резюме
Материалы и методы: Проведено поперечное исследование методом онлайн-анкетирования. В выборку вошли 24 621 респондент в возрасте от 18 лет. Анкета включала блоки по демографическим данным, опыту насилия, обращению за помощью, знанию законодательства и доверию к государственным структурам. Статистическая обработка включала описательную и сравнительную аналитику (х2, р < 0.05).
Результаты: О личном или семейном опыте насилия сообщили 693 человека (2,8 %), при этом физическое (48,2 %) и психологическое (43,7 %) насилие преобладали. Только 1,1 % пострадавших обращались в полицию. Основные барьеры — страх (58,4 %), стыд (46,9 %) и недоверие к системе (34,1 %). Женщины и сельские жители реже обращались за помощью. Почти 95 % респондентов поддерживают профилактику.
Выводы: Домашнее насилие остаётся глубоко латентным. Недостаток доверия к государственным структурам и нормализация насилия препятствуют обращению за помощью. Требуется развитие локальных программ информирования, защиты и поддержки жертв.
Ключевые слова: домашнее насилие, общественное здравоохранение, обращение за помощью, гендерные различия, Казахстан, профилактика.
Для цитирования:
Кырыкбаева С.С., Ошибаева А.Е., Нускабаева Г.О., Горемыкина М.В., Уразалина Н.М. Домашнее насилие как вызов общественному здравоохранению: результаты массового социологического исследования в Туркестанской области // Наука и Здравоохранение. 2025. Уо!.27 (3), С.64-69. ёо! 10.34689/84.2025.27.3.007
Туйшдеме
ТУРК1СТАН ОБЛЫСЫНДАГЫ ЖАППАЙ СОЦИОЛОГИЯЛЫК ЗЕРТТЕУ НЭТИЖЕЛЕР1: ОТБАСЫЛЫК ЗОРЛЫК-ЗОМБЫЛЫК - КОГАМДЫК ДЕНСАУЛЫК САКТАУ ЖУЙЕС1 УШ1Н МАНЫЗДЫ ШАКЫРУ
Салтанат С. Кырыкбаева*1, https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6151-6025 Айнаш Е. Ошибаева1, https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5655-5465 Гульназ О. Нускабаева1, https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2139-3221 Майя В. Горемыкина2, https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5433-7771 Найля М. Уразалина2, https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0200-1763
1 Кожа Ахмет Ясауи атындагы Халыкаралык казак^р^ университетi, ТYркiстан к., Казакстан Республикасы;
2 «Семей медицина университет» КеАК, Семей к-. Казакстан Республикасы.
К1р1спе: Отбасылык зорлык-зомбылык — дэстYрлi гендерлiк кезкарастар басым ефлерде ^амдык денсаулык сактау саласындаFЫ мацызды мэселе болып табылады. К,азакстанда ефлк децгейдеп накты деректердщ жетiспеушiлiгi байкалады.
Зерттеу ма^саты: Туркютан облысы тvрFЫндары арасында отбасылык зорлык-зомбылыктыц таралуын, TYрлерiн, кауiп факторларын, кемекке ЖYгiну децгешн жэне акпараттану децгешн баFалау.
Материалдар мен Эд1стер1: 18 жастан аскан 24 621 респондент арасында онлайн-анонимдi сауалнама ЖYргiзiлдi. Сауалнамада демографиялык, мэлiметтер, зорлык-зомбылык тэжiрибесi, кемекке ЖYгiну, зацнамалык жэне элеуметтiк институттарFа сенiм мэселелерi карастырылды. Деректер х2 жэне р < 0.05 децгейндеп статистикалык талдау аркылы ецделдк
Нэтижелер: Респонденттердщ 2,8 %-ы (693 адам) отбасылык зорлык-зомбылык тэжiрибесi туралы хабарлады. Ец жиi кездескен TYрлерi — физикалык (48,2 %) жэне психологиялык (43,7 %) зорлык. Тек 1,1 %-ы полицияFа ЖYгiнген. Киындыктар — коркыныш (58,4 %), vят (46,9 %) жэне ЖYЙеге сенiмсiздiк (34,1 %). Эйелдер мен ауыл тvрFЫндары сирек кемек сvраFан. 95 %^а жуыFЫ профилактикалык шараларды колдайды.
Кррытынды: Зорлык-зомбылыктыц жасырын сипаты сакталуда. Мемлекеттiк органдарFа сенiмсiздiк пен зорлыкты калыпты кvбылыс ретiнде кабылдау кемек сvрауFа кедергi келтiредi. Аймактык колдау жэне акпараттандыру баFдарламаларын дамыту кажет.
ТYйiндi свздер: отбасылык, зорлык-зомбылык, к,огамдык, денсаулык сактау, кемекке жугну, гендерлк айырмашылыктар, И,азакстан, алдын алу.
Дэйексвз Yшiн:
Кырыкбаева С.С., Ошибаева А.Е., Нускабаева Г.О., Горемыкина М.В., Уразалина Н.М. ТYркiстан облысындаFЫ жаппай социологиялык зерттеу нэтижелерк отбасылык зорлык-зомбылык - ^амдык денсаулык сактау жYЙесi Yшiн мацызды шакыру // Гылым жэне Денсаулык сактау. 2025. Уо!.27 (3), Б. 64-69. ёо! 10.34689/84.20254.27.3.007
Introduction
Domestic violence remains one of the most pressing social issues, impacting human rights, public health, and community resilience. According to the World Health Organization, one in three women worldwide has experienced physical or sexual violence by an intimate partner [22]. In countries with patriarchal norms, such as Kazakhstan, the scale of the problem may be even greater but often remains hidden due to underreporting, stigma, and weak institutional response [6, 8, 9].
According to the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Republic of Kazakhstan, more than 100,000 reports related to domestic violence were filed in 2023, the majority of them from women [5]. In early 2024, over 28,000 new complaints were registered [3]. However, international organizations estimate that many victims do not seek help due to fear of social condemnation and a lack of trust in the effectiveness of the system [4, 6, 17].
Research by UN Women and the OECD shows that Central Asia still lacks effective monitoring mechanisms, and traditional gender norms hinder recognition of the issue [8, 9, 14]
Turkistan Region is a densely populated area with a young demographic and strong cultural traditions. Cases of domestic violence are more frequently recorded here, particularly in rural areas [2]. Since 2021, pilot projects have been implemented in the region, including mobile response teams, trust centers, and awareness campaigns supported by governmental and international organizations [4, 12].
In some local communities, residents have initiated restrictions on alcohol sales — one of the recognized triggers of violence — which has led to a reduction in domestic conflicts [1]. This aligns with the international approach that integrates legal, social, and educational prevention measures [11, 13].
Nevertheless, there is still a lack of large-scale field studies reflecting public opinion on domestic violence—its forms, perceived acceptability, reasons for silence, and trust in support services. Such data are essential not only for understanding the current situation but also for designing effective, evidence-based solutions [20, 21].
The Council of Europe emphasizes that sustainable change is only possible through public engagement and continuous monitoring of societal attitudes [7]. Kazakhstan is currently considering ratification of the Istanbul Convention, but its implementation requires sensitivity to the cultural context and the expectations of the population.
Another important area of prevention is the involvement of men and boys as partners in the fight against violence. UNFPA and the United Nations identify this as one of the most promising approaches, particularly in countries with deeply rooted gender stereotypes [10, 19].
The aim of this study is to assess the prevalence and forms of domestic violence, the level of help-seeking behavior, and awareness of support services among the adult population of the Turkistan Region.
Research objectives:
1. To determine the prevalence of various forms of domestic violence (physical, psychological, economic, etc.) in the region.
2. To identify the sociodemographic characteristics of respondents affected by violence.
3. To analyze victims' help-seeking behavior and identify key barriers to accessing support.
4. To assess the level of trust in protective institutions and awareness of available resources.
5. To develop practical recommendations for the prevention of domestic violence, taking into account regional specificities.
Methods
Study design.
This was a descriptive cross-sectional study conducted through an anonymous online survey. The purpose was to assess the prevalence, forms, and public perceptions of domestic violence, as well as the level of awareness about support services among the adult population.
Sample. A total of 24,621 residents of Turkistan Region aged 18 years and older participated in the survey. The sample was formed through voluntary participation. The questionnaire was distributed via social media platforms, messaging apps, and local NGOs.
Inclusion criteria were: age 18 or older, residence in Turkistan Region, and informed voluntary consent to participate.
Instrument. A structured questionnaire was used, developed based on UNFPA and WHO survey tools, adapted to the regional context. The questionnaire was designed with input from experts in psychology, sociology, and public health. It included six sections:
1. Sociodemographic characteristics
2. Experience of violence and its forms
3. Frequency and recurrence of incidents
4. Help-seeking behavior and perceived barriers
5. Awareness of legal protection mechanisms
6. Subjective perceptions of causes and prevention strategies
The questionnaire underwent expert review for content relevance but was not formally psychometrically validated, as the study was descriptive in nature.
Ethical considerations. Ethical committee approval was not required, as the study involved no interventions and did not collect personal identifying information. Participation was voluntary and anonymous, in accordance with the principles of sociological and humanities research ethics.
Statistical analysis. Data were processed using Microsoft Excel and SPSS version 26. Descriptive statistics (frequencies and percentages) were calculated, and the chi-square test (x2) was applied to assess differences between subgroups (by gender, age, and place of residence). The significance level was set at p < 0.05.
Responses to open-ended questions were analyzed qualitatively, with key themes identified and manually coded.
Results
A total of 24,621 respondents from Turkistan Region participated in the study. The majority of the sample were women — 20,190 individuals (82%), while 4,431 (18%) were men. The most represented age groups were 31-40 years (7,140; 29%) and 41-50 years (5,663; 23%).
More than half of the participants lived in rural areas -14,336 individuals (58.2%), while the remainder resided in urban areas (10,285; 41.8%) (see Table 1).
Table 1. Soaodemograprnc profile of respondents (n = 24,621)
Characteristic Absolute number Percentage (%)
Gender
Women 20,190 82.0%
Men 4,431 18.0%
Age group
18-30 years 5,168 21.0%
31-40 years 7,140 29.0%
41-50 years 5,663 23.0%
51-60 years 3,447 14.0%
Over 60 years 3,203 13.0%
Place of residence
Rural areas 14,336 58.2%
Urban areas 10,285 41.8%
Table 4. Perceived causes of domestic violence (according to all respondents, n = 24,621)._
Absolute number Percentage
Cause
Aggression, lack of mutual respect 5,221 21.2%
Patriarchal norms, family culture 4,583 18.6%
Poverty, financial instability 3,915 15.9%
Alcohol abuse (from open-ended responses) ~1,100 —
Prevalence of Domestic Violence. Out of all
participants, 693 individuals (2.8%) reported having personal or family experience with domestic violence. The most commonly reported types were physical violence — 334 cases (48.2%) and psychological violence - 303 cases (43.7%). Reports of economic and sexual violence were significantly less frequent (see Table 2).
Table 2. Experience of domestic violence among respondents (n = 693 .
The majority of victims experienced repeated or systematic violence. Only 46 individuals (1.1% of those affected) sought help from the police, while 39 people (<1%) accessed medical assistance. A significant portion of respondents preferred to turn to relatives or friends for support (see Table 3).
Table 3. Help-seeking behavior in response to domestic violence (n = 693).
Causes of Violence and Attitudes Toward Prevention. Respondents identified the primary causes of domestic violence as stemming mainly from individual and family-related factors (see Table 4).
Nearly 23,374 respondents, representing 95% of the total sample, expressed support for strengthening domestic violence prevention measures. Notably, 78% of respondents believed that mandatory education on this topic should be introduced in schools and universities.
Gender Differences. The analysis revealed a significant correlation between gender and the likelihood of experiencing domestic violence. Women were nearly three times more likely than men to report such experiences (x2 = 16.4; p < 0.001), and more frequently mentioned repeated episodes and pronounced emotional consequences, such as anxiety, guilt, and a sense of vulnerability. These findings are consistent with international data and highlight the need for gender-sensitive prevention strategies.
Age. The most vulnerable group was individuals aged 31-50, likely due to the combined burden of family, financial, and emotional stressors. Younger (18-30) and older (60+) respondents reported domestic violence less frequently. However, help-seeking behavior did not increase with age, indicating that barriers to seeking support are universal ^ = 10.7; p = 0.005).
Urban vs. Rural. Rural respondents were significantly less informed about available support services and exhibited lower levels of trust in the police and social services (x2 = 12.1; p = 0.001). Fear, shame, and stigma were more commonly cited in rural areas. Even among those who were aware of support options, actual willingness to seek help remained extremely low (x2 = 8.6; p = 0.003), indicating deep-rooted cultural and behavioral barriers that cannot be overcome by information alone.
Discussion. The study revealed a concerning paradox: despite reaching over 24,000 respondents, only 2.8% reported having personal or family experience with domestic violence. This figure is significantly lower than WHO estimates (27-33% among women [22]) and national statistics from Kazakhstan (at least 14-16% [5, 3]).
This discrepancy can be explained by high latency — the reluctance to speak about violence and the lack of recognition of violence as a problem. In rural areas, domestic violence is often perceived as a "private family matter", which aligns with international observations in patriarchal societies [4, 6].
A particularly striking finding is the extremely low rate of help-seeking - fewer than 1% of victims sought help from the police or medical professionals. Meanwhile, 6.7% of respondents reported repeated episodes of abuse. More than half were unaware of available support services, and among those who were informed, less than 10% were willing to use them. This points to a disconnect between the formal availability of services and public trust in them [1, 4].
According to Amnesty International and UN Women, the key barriers include fear of judgment, feelings of guilt, distrust in the system, and fear of secondary victimization [6, 17]. Even in urban settings, women often doubt that
Absolute number Percentage of victims (%)
Type of violence
Physical 334 48.2%
Psychological 303 43.7%
Sexual 21 3.0%
Economic 17 2.5%
Repeated episodes reported 46 6.7%
Behavior / Response Abs. number Percentage (%)
Reported to the police 46 6.6%
Sought medical assistance 39 5.6%
Turned to relatives 286 ~41.2%
Turned to friends 158 ~22.8%
Did not seek any help 250 ~36.1%
Reasons for not seeking help
Fear 405 58.4%
Shame 325 46.9%
Distrust in the system 236 34.1%
seeking help will lead to actual protection, fearing instead that it may worsen their situation.
These perceptions are shaped by prevailing social norms. According to the SIGI Index (OECD), Kazakhstan continues to exhibit a high level of institutional gender discrimination, which limits the legal protection available to women [9]. This hinders the recognition of emotional, economic, and sexual violence as socially significant problems and slows the development of effective support mechanisms.
The analysis of subgroup differences revealed that women experience violence 2-3 times more often than men and are more likely to report anxiety and guilt. The 31-50 age group was identified as the most vulnerable, yet help-seeking did not increase with age, indicating persistent structural and psychological barriers. Rural residents were found to be less informed about services and less trusting of law enforcement — a trend also confirmed by regional reports [2, 18].
Encouragingly, there is a strong public demand for prevention: 95% of respondents consider domestic violence a serious issue, and 78% support introducing education on the topic in schools and universities. This presents a valuable window of opportunity for implementing awareness and prevention programs.
International experience shows that successful initiatives require the involvement of not only professionals, but also community members, religious leaders, and especially men themselves [10, 19]. The importance of "men's clubs" and dialogue platforms has been particularly emphasized, as they promote the re-evaluation of gender roles and encourage nonviolent behavior models [10, 11].
The Council of Europe also stresses the value of a comprehensive, intersectoral approach, which includes not only legal sanctions but also education, support services, and rehabilitation efforts [7]. According to the UN Women's Women Count initiative, systemic change is impossible without regular, reliable statistics that reflect the perspectives of citizens — not just administrative reports [20].
The study highlights three key problems:
1. Cultural latency — violence is not perceived as a deviation from the norm.
2. Institutional mistrust — services exist but are not perceived as a usable resource.
3. Social inequality in access — especially pronounced in rural areas.
Nevertheless, the strong support for prevention expressed by the population creates opportunities for the development of locally adapted strategies aimed at reducing stigma, increasing awareness, and strengthening trust in the support system.
Practical Recommendations
- In light of the identified trends, there is a need for systemic preventive measures tailored to the social context of the region and feasible for implementation in practice:
- It is necessary to expand legal education by including the topic of nonviolence in educational programs, outreach lectures, and local media, especially in rural areas.
- It is important to engage religious and community leaders in promoting zero tolerance toward violence within communities.
- Men's dialogue platforms should be supported to foster the rethinking of gender roles and the development of a culture of nonviolent behavior.
- It is recommended to provide anonymous and accessible digital channels for seeking help — hotlines, chatbots, and mobile applications.
- Regular public opinion monitoring should be conducted to evaluate the effectiveness of measures and adapt them to the needs of the population.
Conclusions
The study demonstrated that domestic violence in the Turkistan Region remains highly latent: only 2.8% of respondents reported having experienced violence, despite evidence of repeated episodes. The most common forms were physical and psychological violence, while sexual and economic violence was the least recognized and rarely disclosed.
Help-seeking behavior was extremely low (less than 1%), limited by fear, shame, lack of trust in services, and low awareness. The most vulnerable groups were women, rural residents, and middle-aged respondents.
The findings underscore the urgent need for regionally adapted prevention strategies that include enhancing legal literacy, reducing stigma, and developing intersectoral cooperation.
Study Limitations: The single-center nature of the study may limit its generalizability, and the absence of long-term follow-up data restricts the assessment of post-discharge outcomes.
Author Contributions: All authors contributed equally to the writing of this manuscript.
Conflict of Interest: The authors declare no conflicts of interest. This material has not been submitted to other journals and is not under consideration elsewhere.
Funding: No funding was received for this study.
Acknowledgements: The authors express their gratitude to the Representative Office of the Commissioner for Human Rights in the Republic of Kazakhstan for Turkistan Region for their support in organizing and conducting the study.
Literature:
1. Agency for Public Development of the Republic of Kazakhstan. Local Community Initiatives for Domestic Violence Prevention: Collection of Practices. - Astana: APDRK, 2024. Available at: https://eljastary.kz/ru/methodics/17358?yearr=81 https://qamqor.gov.kz (accessed 03.12.2024)
2. Analytical Report. Domestic Violence: A Study of the Problem and Solutions in Turkistan Region. - Turkistan, 2025. - 42 p.
3. Committee on Legal Statistics and Special Records of the General Prosecutor's Office of the Republic of Kazakhstan. Unified Register of Offenses [Electronic resource]. Available at: https://qamqor.gov.kz (accessed 03.12.2024)
4. Ministry of Information and Social Development of the Republic of Kazakhstan. Pilot Project on Domestic Violence Response. Press Release. - Astana: MISDRK, 2021. Available at: https://www.gov.kz/memleket/entities/aqmola-bulandy/press/article/details/12267?lang=ru https://qamqor.gov.kz (accessed 06.09.2024)
5. Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Republic of Kazakhstan. Statistical Bulletin on Domestic Violence for 2023. - Astana: MIA RK, 2024.
6. Amnesty International. Kazakhstan: The Invisible Scars - Domestic Violence and Impunity. - London: Amnesty International, 2021. https://www.amnesty.org/en/documents/eur57/3259/2021/e n (accessed 06.09.2024)
7. Council of Europe. Istanbul Convention: Action Against Violence Against Women and Domestic Violence. -Strasbourg: Council of Europe, 2011. https://www.coe.int/en/web/istanbul-convention (accessed 06.09.2024)
8. Garcia-Moreno C., Jansen H.A.F.M., Ellsberg M., Heise L, Watts C.H. WHO Multi-country Study on Women's Health and Domestic Violence Against Women: Initial Results on Prevalence, Health Outcomes and Women's Responses. - Geneva: WHO, 2005. https://www.who.int/publications-detail-redirect/who-multi-country-study-on-women-s-health-and-domestic-violence-against-women (accessed 06.09.2024)
9. OECD Development Centre. Social Institutions and Gender Index (SIGI) 2023 Global Report. - Paris: OECD, 2023. https://www.oecd.org/en/publications/sigi-2023-global-report_4607b7c7-en.html
10. UNFPA. Engaging Men and Boys in Gender Equality and Health: A Global Toolkit for Action. - New York: UNFPA, 2010. https://www.unfpa.org/publications/engaging-men-and-boys-gender-equality-and-health (accessed 06.09.2024)
11. UNFPA EECA Regional Office. Community Mobilization to Prevent Domestic Violence in Rural Areas. -Almaty: UNFPA, 2022.
12. UNFPA. Rapid Gender Assessment for the COVID-19 Situation in the Republic of Kazakhstan. - NurSultan: UNFPA, 2021. https://kazakhstan.unfpa.org/sites/default/files/pub-pdf/rga_eng_.pdf (accessed 06.09.2024)
13. UNODC. Global Study on Homicide: Gender-Related Killing of Women and Girls. - Vienna: UNODC, 2019. https://www.unodc.org/documents/data-and-analysis/gsh/Booklet_5.pdf (accessed 08.11.2024)
14. UN Women. Ending Violence Against Women in Central Asia: Legal and Policy Review. - Almaty: UN
Women, 2023. https://eca.unwomen.org/en/stories/press-release/2025/02/united-to-advance-the-2030-agenda-central-asia-countries-pledge-to-act-for-gender-equality-in-the-region (accessed 08.11.2024)
15. UN Women. Gender Equality in Times of Crisis: SIGI 2023 Global Report. - Paris: OECD, 2023. https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/development/sigi-2023-global-report_939a6819-en
16. UN Women. Progress of the World's Women 2019-2020: Families in a Changing World. - New York: UN Women, 2020. https://www.unwomen.org/en/digital-library/publications/2019/06/progress-of-the-worlds-women-2019-2020 (accessed 08.11.2024)
17. UN Women. Research and Data: Ending Violence Against Women. - New York: UN Women, 2023. Available at: https://www.unwomen.org/en/what-we-do/ending-violence-against-women/research-and-data (accessed 08.11.2024)
18. UN Women. The Dark Side of Digitization: Technology-Facilitated Gender-Based Violence in Central Asia. - Almaty: UN Women, 2024. Available at: https://eca.unwomen.org/sites/default/files/2024-01/research-tf-vaw_full-report_24-january2.pdf (accessed 08.11.2024)
19. UN Women. Uniting for Progress: Launch of the Central Asian Alliance to End Gender-Based Violence. -New York: UN Women, 2023. Available at: https://open.unwomen.org/en/our-reach/KZ/XM-DAC-41146-KAZ_D_1.1 (accessed 22.12.2024)
20. UN Women. Women Count: Europe and Central Asia. - New York: UN Women, 2024. Available at: https://data.unwomen.org/sites/default/files/documents/Wo men%20Count/Women_Count_Europe_and_Central_Asia. pdf (accessed 10.09.2024)
21. UN Women. Women Count: The State of Gender Data in Europe and Central Asia. - New York: UN Women, 2022. https://data.unwomen.org/publications/state-gender-data-europe-central-asia (accessed 08.11.2024)
World Health Organization. Violence Against Women: Prevalence Estimates, 2018. - Geneva: WHO, 2021. https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789240022256 (accessed 03.10.2024)
Information about the authors:
Oshibaeva Ainash Esimbekovna - Vice-Rector of Science and Strategic Development of the International Kazakh-Turkish University named after Khoja Ahmet Yasavi, Turkestan, tel: +7-701-717-06-34 e-mail: [email protected], https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5655-5465
Nuskabayeva Gulnaz Orazbekovna - Candidate of medical sciences, associate professor, Dean of the Faculty of Medicine Department of "Special Clinical Disciplines", Faculty of Medicine Khoja Akhmet Yassawi International kazakh-turkish University, Turkestan city, Republic of Kazakhstan; email - [email protected]; Phone: +77052853131; https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2139-3221
Goremykina Maiya Valentinovna - Candidate of Medical Sciences, Associate Professor, Department of Internal Medicine and Rheumatology, NCJSC «Semey Medical University», 103 Abay Street, Semey, 071400, Kazakhstan; Email: [email protected]; phone number: +7 (777) 390 8234; https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5433-7771 Urazalina Nailya Muratkhanovna - Candidate of Medical Sciences, Associate Professor of the Department of physiological disciplines named after honored scientist of the republic of Kazakhstan, professor T.A. Nazarova, NJSC "Semey Medical University", Semey, Kazakhstan; phone: 8 777 907 55 89, e-mail: [email protected], https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0200-1763
Corresponding author:
* Kyrykbayeva Saltanat Sayatovna - MD, PhD, Head of the Center for Strategic Development, Rating and Quality of the International Kazakh-Turkish University named after Khoja Ahmet Yasawi; https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6151-6025 Postal code: X41A4E4, Bekzat Sattarhanov Street No:29 Turkestan/ Kazakhstan E-mail: [email protected] Phone: +7 775 537 97 57
