| Title |
Patterns, aetiology and risk factors of intimate partner violence-related injuries to head, neck and face in Chinese women
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Women's Health, January 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1472-6874-14-6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Janet Yuen-Ha Wong, Anna Wai-Man Choi, Daniel Yee-Tak Fong, John Kit-Shing Wong, Chu-Leung Lau, Chak-Wah Kam |
| Abstract |
Intimate partner violence (IPV) related injuries have been recognized among health care professionals. However, few studies have provided detailed information on injuries to the head, neck and face regions in Chinese women. As abused Chinese women are generally unwilling to disclose IPV and there are differences in socio-demographic characteristics, societal norms and behaviours, the women may exhibit different patterns, aetiology and risk factors of IPV-related HNF injuries. This study aims to examine the patterns of head, neck and face injuries presenting to Accident and Emergency departments, including the anatomical regions, types, severity, aetiology and demographic and non-demographic risk factors of injuries inflicted by intimate partners in Chinese context. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 94 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nigeria | 1 | 1% |
| Canada | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 92 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 15 | 16% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 13 | 14% |
| Student > Master | 13 | 14% |
| Researcher | 8 | 9% |
| Other | 6 | 6% |
| Other | 18 | 19% |
| Unknown | 21 | 22% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 36 | 38% |
| Psychology | 14 | 15% |
| Social Sciences | 5 | 5% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 3% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 7 | 7% |
| Unknown | 27 | 29% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 12 January 2014.
All research outputs
#18,360,179
of 22,739,983 outputs
Outputs from BMC Women's Health
#1,477
of 1,794 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#228,918
of 304,956 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Women's Health
#27
of 33 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,739,983 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,794 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.7. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% 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 304,956 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 33 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 3rd percentile – i.e., 3% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.