Observational studyJournal of psychiatric research2024
Research with women sexual assault survivors presenting for emergency care is safe: Results from a multi-site, prospective observational cohort study.
Observational study in Journal of psychiatric research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Testing a Smartphone-Based Intervention Targeting Anxiety Sensitivity Among Women Presenting for Emergency Care After Sexual Assault: Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial.JMIR formative research · 2026Trial
- Therapists perspectives on the Early Intervention after Rape study: a qualitative process evaluation of a randomized controlled trial.European journal of psychotraumatology · 2025Trial
- Painful, but necessary: a qualitative process evaluation on patient experiences with modified prolonged exposure as early intervention after rape (the EIR study).European journal of psychotraumatology · 2025Trial
- Understanding nightmares after traumatic events in Detroit (UNiTED): prospective associations with interpersonal violence and posttraumatic stress disorder symptoms.European journal of psychotraumatology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors.
Funding
Abstract
A barrier to research with sexual assault survivors is the concern that research participation might be a negative experience for participants. We report the experiences with research of adult women sexual assault survivors participating in a large-scale, multi-site, prospective observational study that enrolled participants at the time of presentation for emergency care. Participants (n = 706, M = 28 years of age; 57% white, 15% Black) self-reported their experience with research 1 week, 6 weeks, 6 months, and 1 year post-assault. The vast majority rated the research experience as positive (95-97%), reported no drawbacks (84-89%), and felt that participating was worth it (93-95%). Positive experiences with research remained stable across the year, were generally consistent across demographic and clinical groups, and were reflected in qualitative comments. Given the tremendous morbidity experienced by sexual assault survivors and lack of progress in developing improved treatments for this population, ethically-conducted research with sexual assault survivors receiving emergency care should be encouraged.
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.