↓ Skip to main content

Violence against children in Latin America and Caribbean countries: a comprehensive review of national health sector efforts in prevention and response

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, September 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (75th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (63rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
10 X users
facebook
3 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
22 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
194 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Violence against children in Latin America and Caribbean countries: a comprehensive review of national health sector efforts in prevention and response
Published in
BMC Public Health, September 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12889-016-3562-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Andrea L. Wirtz, Carmen Alvarez, Alessandra C. Guedes, Luisa Brumana, Cecilie Modvar, Nancy Glass

Abstract

Violence against children (VAC) remains a global problem. The health sector has an opportunity and responsibility to be part of the multi-sector collaboration to prevent and respond to VAC. This review aimed to assess the health sector's response to VAC among Latin American & Caribbean (LAC) countries, particularly as it relates to physical violence, sexual violence, and neglect. National protocols for the identification and provision of health care to child survivors of violence, abuse and neglect were solicited in partnership with UNICEF and PAHO/WHO country offices within the LAC region. A parallel systematic review was undertaken in January 2015 to review studies published in the last 10 years that describe the regional health sector response to VAC. We obtained health sectors guidelines/protocols related to VAC from 22 of 43 (51 %) countries and reviewed 97 published articles/reports that met the review inclusion criteria. Country protocols were presented in Spanish (n = 12), Portuguese (n = 1), and English (n = 9). Thematic areas of country protocols included: 1) identifying signs and symptoms of VAC, 2) providing patient-centered care to the victim, and 3) immediate treatment of injuries related to VAC. The systematic review revealed that health professionals are often unaware of national protocols and lack training, resources, and support to respond to cases of VAC. Further, there is limited coordination between health and social protection services. VAC remains an international, public health priority. Health professionals are well-positioned to identify, treat and refer cases of VAC to appropriate institutions and community-based partners. However, poor protocol dissemination and training, limited infrastructure, and inadequate human resources challenge adherence to VAC guidelines.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 194 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 193 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 22 11%
Student > Bachelor 22 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 21 11%
Researcher 16 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 15 8%
Other 34 18%
Unknown 64 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 40 21%
Social Sciences 26 13%
Medicine and Dentistry 22 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 21 11%
Arts and Humanities 9 5%
Other 14 7%
Unknown 62 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 26 October 2016.
All research outputs
#4,623,528
of 22,889,074 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#5,096
of 14,925 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#77,453
of 321,009 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#111
of 302 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,889,074 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 14,925 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 321,009 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 302 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% of its contemporaries.