↓ Skip to main content

Healthcare system responses to intimate partner violence in low and middle-income countries: evidence is growing and the challenges become clearer

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medicine, July 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
91 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
Healthcare system responses to intimate partner violence in low and middle-income countries: evidence is growing and the challenges become clearer
Published in
BMC Medicine, July 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12916-017-0886-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Angela Taft, Manuela Colombini

Abstract

The damage to health caused by intimate partner violence demands effective responses from healthcare providers and healthcare systems worldwide. To date, most evidence for the few existing, effective interventions in use comes from high-income countries. Gupta et al. provide rare evidence of a nurse-delivered intimate partner violence screening, supportive care and referral intervention from a large-scale randomised trial in Mexican public health clinics. No difference was found in the primary outcome of reduction in intimate partner violence. There were significant short-term benefits in safety planning and mental health (secondary outcomes) for women in the intervention arm, but these were not sustained.This important study highlights the challenges of primary outcome choices in such studies, and further challenges for the sustainability of healthcare systems and healthcare provider interventions. These challenges include the role of theory for sustainability and the risk that baseline measures of intimate partner violence can wash out intervention effects. We emphasise the importance of studying the processes of adaptation, integration and coordination in the context of the wider healthcare system.Please see related article: https://bmcmedicine.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12916-017-0880-y.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 91 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 91 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 13%
Researcher 12 13%
Student > Master 9 10%
Student > Bachelor 6 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 5%
Other 14 15%
Unknown 33 36%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 16 18%
Social Sciences 15 16%
Nursing and Health Professions 12 13%
Psychology 7 8%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 2 2%
Other 6 7%
Unknown 33 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 22 August 2017.
All research outputs
#15,147,354
of 23,298,349 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medicine
#3,056
of 3,506 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#186,946
of 313,402 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medicine
#46
of 53 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,298,349 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,506 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 43.7. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 313,402 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 53 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.