Cited by 10Sexual Assault and Victimization StudiesIntimate Partner and Family ViolenceChild Abuse and Trauma

Intimate Partner Violence and Completion of Post-Sexual Assault Medical Forensic Examination Follow-Up Screening

Open access
Gilmore, Amanda K., Jaffe, Anna E., Hahn, Christine K., Ridings, Leigh E., Gill-Hopple, Kathy, Lazenby, Gweneth B., Flanagan, Julianne C.·2021·Journal of Interpersonal Violence

Abstract

Sexual assault is a major public health concern associated with significant mental health and medical symptoms. Follow-up screening post-sexual assault medical forensic examination (SAMFE) can be one method of determining needs and providing targeted prevention of mental health and medical symptoms among individuals who experienced a recent sexual assault. However, the factors associated with engagement in post-SAMFE follow-up screening have not been identified. The current study examined the association between intimate partner violence victimization and sexual assault–related characteristics and engagement in post-SAMFE follow-up screening. Participants were 193 individuals who received a SAMFE and indicated at the time of SAMFE that they were interested in follow-up by the hospital. It was found that individuals were less likely to engage in follow-up screening if the assault was perpetrated by an intimate partner. These findings suggest that other resources are needed to reach individuals who experience sexual assault perpetrated by an intimate partner due to the unique needs of that population.

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 · 10.1177/0886260518817022

Cites

6 of 6 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

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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Gilmore, A. K., Jaffe, A. E., Hahn, C. K., Ridings, L. E., Gill-Hopple, K., Lazenby, G. B., & Flanagan, J. C.
Affiliations
  • Medical University of South Carolina (US)
  • University of Washington (US)
Corresponding author
Gilmore, Amanda K.
Venue
Journal of Interpersonal Violence
Published
2018-12-10
Volume
36
Issue
13-14
Pages
5991-6004
ISSN
  • 0886-2605 (ISSN-L)
  • 1552-6518
OpenAlex
W2905073201
Cited by
10
References
6
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2023: 2 · 2021: 2 · 2019: 3
FWCI
2.33
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Interpersonal Violence (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (UL1 TR001450)
  • National Institute on Drug Abuse (K23DA042935)
  • National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (K23AA023845)
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
intimate partner violence, sexual assault, forensic medical examination, follow-up screening, intimate partner perpetrators, sexual assault survivors, mental health needs, clinical symptoms
MeSH terms
Intimate Partner Violence, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Sex Offenses, Sexual Partners, Crime Victims

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