CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 20Female Genital Mutilation/Cutting IssuesChild Abuse and Related TraumaUreteral procedures and complications

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Female genital mutilation: empirical evidence supports concerns about statistics and safeguarding

Karlsen, Saffron, Mogilnicka, Magda, Carver, Natasha, Pantazis, Christina·2019·BMJ
DOI 10.1136/bmj.l915
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Findings from our recent work with Somali families living in Bristol1 provide empirical support for the concerns raised by Creighton and colleagues about the UK’s response to female genital mutilation (FGM).2 Focus group discussions documented the myriad ways in which approaches to safeguarding against FGM—whether provided in healthcare, through children’s schools, or particularly through the heavy handed approaches of social services and police conducting …

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1136/bmj.l915

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Citations

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Karlsen, Understanding the experiences of FGM-safeguarding services among Somalis living in Bristol Bristol, University of Bristol
  2. 10.1136/bmj.l15 · DOI · Paper page
  3. 10.1093/bjc/azp031 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 20

Metadata

Authors
Karlsen, S., Mogilnicka, M., Carver, N., & Pantazis, C.
Affiliations
  • University of Bristol (GB)
  • Cardiff University (GB)
Corresponding author
Karlsen, Saffron
ORCID
Venue
BMJ
Publisher
BMJ
Published
2019-03-04
Volume
364
Pages
l915
ISSN
  • 1756-1833 (ISSN-L)
  • 0959-8138
DOI
10.1136/bmj.l915
OpenAlex
W2918660187
Cited by
20
References
0
Citations by year
2025: 2 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 7
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.bmj.com/company/legal-information/terms-conditions/legal-information/tdm-licencepolicy (tdm)
Locations
  • BMJ (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Explore Bristol Research (publishedVersion)
  • ePrints Soton (University of Southampton) (acceptedVersion)
  • ORCA Online Research @Cardiff (Cardiff University) (submittedVersion)
  • HighWire Press Open Archive (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Female Genital Mutilation/Cutting Issues
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Child Abuse and Related Trauma
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Urology › Ureteral procedures and complications
Keywords
female genital mutilation, statistics, safeguarding, data quality, child protection
MeSH terms
Female, United Kingdom, Humans, Circumcision, Female

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