↓ Skip to main content

Prospective evaluation of intimate partner violence in fracture clinics (PRAISE-2): protocol for a multicentre pilot prospective cohort study

Overview of attention for article published in Pilot and Feasibility Studies, June 2018
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
4 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
38 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
Prospective evaluation of intimate partner violence in fracture clinics (PRAISE-2): protocol for a multicentre pilot prospective cohort study
Published in
Pilot and Feasibility Studies, June 2018
DOI 10.1186/s40814-018-0301-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kim Madden, PRAISE-2 Investigators

Abstract

One third of women experience intimate partner violence (IPV) in their lifetime. Orthopaedic health care professionals are in a good position to identify women experiencing escalating physical violence and act to promote their immediate safety, connect them to IPV resources, and reduce the risk of further harm. However, there have been no studies that explore whether experiencing a musculoskeletal injury can trigger or worsen IPV, and there have been no studies on how experiences of IPV affect orthopaedic outcomes. The primary objective of the PRAISE-2 pilot study is to assess the feasibility of conducting a large cohort study to determine the association between IPV and injury-related complications. The secondary clinical objectives are to preliminarily explore how a history of IPV affects orthopaedic outcomes and how patterns of IPV change over time following an orthopaedic injury. We will complete a pilot multicentre prospective cohort study of 250 women with musculoskeletal injuries to determine the feasibility of a multinational prospective cohort study that will determine if prior or ongoing IPV affects orthopaedic outcomes following an injury, and how patterns of IPV change over time. Our primary outcome is feasibility measured using recruitment rate (success criterion 50 patients/site in 12 months), adherence to visit windows (success criterion 75%), participant retention (success criterion 85%), and data completeness (success criterion 80%). Our secondary exploratory clinical outcomes are injury-related complications, return to function, new IPV disclosures, utilization and cost of support services, changes in abuse patterns, quality of life, and readiness to make relationship changes. We will assess feasibility based on pre-defined criteria for feasibility success and we will analyze secondary outcomes in an exploratory fashion. The PRAISE-2 pilot study is the first step toward determining how experiences of IPV affect orthopaedic outcomes such as injury-related complications. This study will determine feasibility and assist in the development of large-scale multinational prospective IPV studies for our future IPV research program. This study will engage health care professionals from around the world to increase awareness of how IPV affects patients' musculoskeletal and injury outcomes. clinicaltrials.gov NCT02529267. Registered 20 Aug 2015.

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 38 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 38 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 5 13%
Student > Bachelor 5 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 8%
Student > Postgraduate 3 8%
Professor > Associate Professor 3 8%
Other 6 16%
Unknown 13 34%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 7 18%
Psychology 5 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 11%
Unspecified 2 5%
Mathematics 1 3%
Other 5 13%
Unknown 14 37%
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 18 July 2018.
All research outputs
#14,133,034
of 23,090,520 outputs
Outputs from Pilot and Feasibility Studies
#637
of 1,049 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#179,173
of 328,721 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Pilot and Feasibility Studies
#29
of 38 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,090,520 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 1,049 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.9. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% 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 328,721 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 38 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.