ArticleJournal of elder abuse & neglect
Developing a model for providing feedback to reporters of elder abuse.
Article in Journal of elder abuse & neglect. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Accelerating the pace of elder justice policy to meet the needs of a growing aging population.Journal of the American Geriatrics Society · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Lack of feedback about reports made to Adult Protective Services (APS) is an important barrier to elder mistreatment reporting. To better understand barriers and facilitators to APS-reporter communication, we conducted an environmental scan of state policies and practices. We gathered publicly available information from 52 states and territories on APS administrative structure, reporting, intake, investigation, and feedback processes; performed a secondary analysis of focus groups with Emergency Medical Services providers and APS staff; and interviewed 44 APS leaders in 24 states/territories. Results revealed variation in information-sharing with reporters. Qualitative analyses revealed three overarching themes related to whether, when, and how information is shared. Results were used to develop a model illustrating factors influencing APS decisions on sharing information. This model incorporates the type of reporter (professional or nonprofessional), their relationship with the APS client (brief or ongoing), and the potential risks and benefits of sharing information with the reporter.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.