Cited by 67Sexual Assault and Victimization StudiesIntimate Partner and Family ViolenceChild Abuse and Trauma

Sexual assault victims: factors associated with follow-up care.

Open access
Ackerman, D.R., Sugar, N.F., Fine, D.N., Eckert, L.O.·2006·American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology

Abstract

Objective This study was undertaken to describe patient, assault, and examination characteristics associated with compliance with follow-up in sexual assault victims.Study design We conducted a retrospective cohort study of consecutive women presenting to an urban hospital after sexual assault over a 36-month period. We compared those who did and did not follow-up by using standardized history, examination, and data collection forms.Results Eight hundred twelve women met inclusion criteria; 288 (35.5%) attended follow-up. Young age (odds ratio [OR] = 2.70), assault at home (OR = 1.90), amnesia (OR = 1.80), alcohol use (OR = 1.55), genital trauma (OR = 1.55), and receipt of postexamination medications (OR = 1.87) were associated with greater follow-up; homelessness (OR = 0.30), psychiatric diagnosis (OR = 0.34), assault by an intimate partner (OR = 0.47), and cocaine use (OR = 0.29) with less.Conclusion Although only 35.5% of sexual assault victims seek follow-up, we found many factors positively and negatively associated with this. These findings may inform care strategies designed to improve follow-up for women who are at risk for significant sequelae.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.ajog.2006.03.014

Cites

10 of 10 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • There is limited knowledge about individuals' post-sexual-assault-exam support pathways or experiences and their ability or desire to further access support.

    “However, there is limited knowledge about individuals’ post-SA exam support pathways or experiences and their ability or desire to further access support (Ackerman et al., 2006; Darnell et al., 2015).”

    From “Having One Person Tell Me I Didn’t Do the Wrong Thing”: The Impact of Support on the Post-Sexual Assault Exam Experience (2024) · cites this paper as Ackerman et al., 2006

    The paper’s introduction (page not supplied) says few studies had examined factors associated with returning for care after a sexual assault exam, supporting the claim of limited knowledge about further access to care. Its Results and Comment (pages not supplied) address follow-up attendance, but do not examine individuals’ support pathways, experiences, or desire for support. (LLM, conf=0.85)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Of those individuals who receive a sexual assault exam, only 28-36% follow up with recommended care or resources.

    “Of those individuals who receive a SA exam, only 28–36% follow up with recommended care or resources (Ackerman et al., 2006; Darnell et al., 2015; Gilmore et al., 2018; Holmes et al., 1998).”
  • Compliance with follow-up visits is typically poor among survivors of sexual assault.

    “Although collection of specimens at initial examination for laboratory STI diagnosis gives the survivor and clinician the option of deferring empiric prophylactic antimicrobial treatment, compliance with follow-up visits is typically poor (1423–1425).”

    From Sexually Transmitted Infections Treatment Guidelines, 2021 (2021) · cites this paper as [1423]

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. American college of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Sexual assault. Washington (DC): The College; 1992. Technical bulletin No. 242.
  2. Yehuda R. Post-truamatic stress disorder. N Engl J Med 2003;346: 108-14.
  3. Sexual assault and STDs. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 2002; 51:50-61.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Ackerman, D. R., Sugar, N. F., Fine, D. N., & Eckert, L. O.
Affiliations
University of Washington (US)
Venue
American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2006-06
Volume
194
Issue
6
Pages
1653-1659
ISSN
0002-9378 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2076245332
Cited by
67
References
10
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 6
FWCI
3.41
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Sexual Assault and Victimization Studies
  • Social Sciences › Health › Intimate Partner and Family Violence
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Child Abuse and Trauma
Keywords
sexual assault, follow-up care, medication adherence, intimate partner assault, homelessness, amnesia, alcohol consumption, cocaine use, genital trauma, women's health
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Age Factors, Aged, Mental Disorders, Drug Therapy, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Patient Care, Genitalia, Female, Ill-Housed Persons, Humans, Middle Aged, Patient Compliance, Retrospective Studies, Sex Offenses, Cohort Studies, Multivariate Analysis, Domestic Violence, Crime Victims, Substance-Related Disorders, Cocaine-Related Disorders

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review