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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Collecting sexual assault history and forensic evidence from adult women in the emergency department: a retrospective study
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Health Services Research, May 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12913-018-3205-8 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Pamela Tozzo, Elena Ponzano, Gloria Spigarolo, Patrizia Nespeca, Luciana Caenazzo |
| Abstract |
The objective of this retrospective study was to examine the discrepancy between information derived from written medical reports and the results of forensic DNA analyses on swabs collected from the victims in 122 cases of alleged sexual assault treated at the Emergency Department of Padua Hospital. The examination of discrepant results has proved useful to support a broader application of sexual assault management, particularly during the taking of case history. The Laboratory of Forensic Genetics of Padua University have processed samples from 122 sexual assault cases over a period of 5 years. Of the 103 cases in which the victim reported a penetration and ejaculation, only 67 (55% of all the samples) correlated with positive feedback match from the laboratory. In 36 cases in which the patient reported penetration with ejaculation, no male DNA was found in the samples collected. Therefore, there was a total of 41 cases in which the patient's report were not supported by laboratory data. In the remaining ten cases, which had an ambiguous history, 3 tested positively for the presence of male DNA. To avoid discrepancies between the medical reporting and reconstruction of sex crimes, it is crucial to deploy strategies which focus not only on the technical aspects of evidence collection, but also on how the victim's story is recorded; such efforts could lead to better management of sexual assault victims, and to a strengthened legal impact of forensic evidence and of crime reconstruction. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 33% |
| Spain | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 78 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 78 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 12 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 8 | 10% |
| Researcher | 6 | 8% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 6% |
| Other | 4 | 5% |
| Other | 10 | 13% |
| Unknown | 33 | 42% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 17 | 22% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 10 | 13% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 8 | 10% |
| Psychology | 3 | 4% |
| Social Sciences | 3 | 4% |
| Other | 5 | 6% |
| Unknown | 32 | 41% |
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 18 July 2020.
All research outputs
#14,130,357
of 23,085,832 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#4,999
of 7,732 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#180,849
of 331,255 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#158
of 207 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,085,832 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,732 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.8. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% 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 331,255 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 207 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.