Cited by 40Child Abuse and Related TraumaChild Abuse and TraumaSexual Assault and Victimization Studies

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 10 of the 10 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Value of follow-up examinations of children and adolescents evaluated for sexual abuse and assault.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to determine whether follow-up examinations of suspected victims of child sexual abuse influence medical diagnosis or treatment. METHODS: A retrospective chart review of patients with initial and follow-up examinations (examinations 1 and 2, respectively) over a 5-year study period was conducted. Patient and abuse characteristics, interval between examinations and abuse, and examiner experience levels were collected; examination findings and test results for sexually transmitted infections (STIs) were compared for examinations 1 and 2. RESULTS: Among 727 patients, examination 2 resulted in a change in interpretation of trauma likelihood in 129 (17.7%) patients and identified STIs in 47 (6.5%) patients. Changes in trauma likelihood and detection of additional STIs during follow-up examinations were more likely in adolescent, female, and sexually active patients and those with a history of genital-genital contact, unknown examination 1 findings, or drug-facilitated sexual assault. Although examination 2 was less likely to affect the interpretation of trauma likelihood and STIs in preadolescent patients, a change in interpretation of trauma likelihood was noted for 49 (15.5%) of these patients, and 16 (5.1%) were diagnosed with a new STI on examination 2. The level of clinician experience during examination 1 did affect the likelihood of changes in examination findings during examination 2. CONCLUSIONS: Follow-up examinations by specialists affected the interpretation of trauma and detection of STIs in ∼23% of pediatric patients undergoing sexual abuse assessments.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1542/peds.2011-0804

Cites

10 of 10 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, 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

Show all 10 references

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. American Academy of Pediatrics, 2009, Human Papilloma Viruses, 479

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Gavril, A. R., Kellogg, N. D., & Nair, P.
Affiliations
  • The University of Texas at San Antonio Health Science Center (US)
  • The University of Texas at Austin (US)
Venue
PEDIATRICS
Published
2012-02-01
Volume
129
Issue
2
Pages
282-289
ISSN
  • 0031-4005 (ISSN-L)
  • 1098-4275
OpenAlex
W2073525376
Cited by
40
References
10
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 2 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 1
FWCI
4.46
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • PEDIATRICS (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Child Abuse and Related Trauma
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Child Abuse and Trauma
  • Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Sexual Assault and Victimization Studies
Keywords
child sexual abuse, sexual assault, follow-up examination, sexually transmitted infections, trauma assessment, drug-facilitated sexual assault, adolescent sexual abuse, clinician experience
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Child, Child Abuse, Sexual, Female, Genitalia, Female, Genitalia, Male, Humans, Male, Physical Examination, Retrospective Studies, Sexually Transmitted Diseases, Texas, Violence, Wounds and Injuries, Likelihood Functions, Retreatment, Substance-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