↓ Skip to main content

Multidisciplinary Team Legislative Language Associated With Elder Abuse Investigations

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Elder Abuse & Neglect, December 2013
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
10 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Article details
Title
Multidisciplinary Team Legislative Language Associated With Elder Abuse Investigations
Published in
Journal of Elder Abuse & Neglect, December 2013
DOI 10.1080/08946566.2013.782783
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Professionals from different disciplines providing care and services to persons at risk for or victims of elder abuse have formed various multidisciplinary teams (MDTs). The purpose of the study was to identify the adult protective services-related statutory trends in presence of MDT content and to determine the association of MDT legislation on the rates of reported, investigated, and substantiated domestic elder abuse. Aggregate reports of elder abuse and state statutes for 1999 and 2007 were retrieved from 50 states and the District of Columbia. Statutes of eight states in 2000 and nine in 2008 included text about MDTs. In 2007, investigation rates for those states having MDT text in the statutes were significantly higher than those states without. The incidence of MDTs in the country is unknown. Legislative text is but one factor associated with differences in elder abuse report, investigation, or substantiation rates.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

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.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 10 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Austria 1 10%
Unknown 9 90%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 20%
Other 1 10%
Lecturer 1 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 10%
Researcher 1 10%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 4 40%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Computer Science 2 20%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 10%
Psychology 1 10%
Social Sciences 1 10%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 10%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 4 40%
Attention Score in Context

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 13 December 2013.
All research outputs
#28,602,152
of 34,361,833 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Elder Abuse & Neglect
#275
of 301 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#306,645
of 376,452 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Elder Abuse & Neglect
#2
of 3 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,361,833 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 301 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.7. This one is in the 3rd percentile – i.e., 3% 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 376,452 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.