↓ Skip to main content

Barriers in detecting elder abuse among emergency medical technicians

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Emergency Medicine, September 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (55th percentile)

Mentioned by

2 tweeters


4 Dimensions

Readers on

24 Mendeley
Barriers in detecting elder abuse among emergency medical technicians
Published in
BMC Emergency Medicine, September 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12873-016-0100-7
Pubmed ID

Jennifer M. Reingle Gonzalez, M. Brad Cannell, Katelyn K. Jetelina, Sepeadeh Radpour


Elder abuse and neglect are highly under-reported in the United States. This may be partially attributed to low incidence of reporting among emergency medical technicians' (EMTs), despite state-mandated reporting of suspected elder abuse. Innovative solutions are needed to address under-reporting. The objective was to describe EMTs' experience detecting and reporting elder abuse. Qualitative data were collected from 11 EMTs and 12 Adult Protective Services (APS) caseworkers that participated in one of five semi-structured focus groups. Focus group data were iteratively coded by two coders. Findings suggest a number of barriers prevent EMTs from reporting elder abuse to APS. Participants suggested that limited training on elder abuse detection or reporting has been provided to them. EMTs suggested that training, creation of an automated reporting system or brief screening tool could be used to enhance EMT's ability to detect and communicate suspected cases of elder abuse to APS. Results from the present study suggest that EMTs may be uniquely situated to serve as elder abuse and neglect surveillance personnel. EMTs are eager to work with APS to address the under-reporting of elder abuse and neglect, but training is minimal and current reporting procedures are time-prohibitive given their primary role as emergency healthcare providers. Future studies should seek to translate these findings into practice by identifying specific indicators predictive of elder abuse and neglect for inclusion on an automated reporting instrument for EMTs.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 24 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 4%
Unknown 23 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 6 25%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 17%
Unspecified 3 13%
Researcher 3 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 8%
Other 6 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 12 50%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 21%
Unspecified 3 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 13%
Psychology 1 4%
Other 0 0%

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 15 August 2017.
All research outputs
of 13,661,946 outputs
Outputs from BMC Emergency Medicine
of 361 outputs
Outputs of similar age
of 261,335 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Emergency Medicine
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,661,946 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 361 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.2. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% 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 261,335 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them