↓ Skip to main content

Oxford University Press

Article Metrics

Utilization of Formal Support Services for Elder Abuse: Do Informal Supporters Make a Difference?

Overview of attention for article published in Gerontologist, June 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
14 Mendeley
Title
Utilization of Formal Support Services for Elder Abuse: Do Informal Supporters Make a Difference?
Published in
Gerontologist, June 2018
DOI 10.1093/geront/gny074
Pubmed ID
Authors

David Burnes, Risa Breckman, Charles R Henderson, Mark S Lachs, Karl Pillemer

Abstract

Few elder abuse (EA) victims ever seek or receive assistance from formal support services designed to mitigate risk and harm of revictimization. This study examined whether the presence of third-party "concerned persons" in victims' personal social networks plays a role in enabling formal support service utilization. A representative population-based survey administered to adults (n = 800) in New York State identified 83 EA cases from the past year. Penalized likelihood logistic regression was used to examine the relationship between availability of a concerned person and victim formal support services usage. EA victims who had a concerned person in their personal life were significantly more likely to use formal EA support services than victims without a concerned person. EA victims who lived with their perpetrator were significantly less likely to use formal services. Third-party concerned persons represent a critical population to target in efforts designed to promote EA victim help-seeking.

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 14 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 14 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 3 21%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 21%
Professor 2 14%
Other 1 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 7%
Other 2 14%
Unknown 2 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 6 43%
Social Sciences 3 21%
Psychology 2 14%
Unknown 3 21%

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 29 July 2019.
All research outputs
#11,858,433
of 15,542,184 outputs
Outputs from Gerontologist
#1,881
of 2,095 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#190,340
of 276,642 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Gerontologist
#25
of 29 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 15,542,184 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,095 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.3. 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 276,642 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 29 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.