ArticleBMJ open2024
Measuring technology-facilitated sexual violence and abuse: a scoping review protocol of existing measurements.
Article in BMJ open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Technology-facilitated sexual violence against women and its health impact: a mixed-methods systematic review.BMC public health · 2026Pooled it
- Measuring Technology-Facilitated Sexual Violence and Abuse: Scoping Review of Existing Measures.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Indonesian adolescent girls' perceptions of electronic sexual-based violence: insights from a qualitative study with clinical expert input.BMC public health · 2026Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionTechnology-facilitated sexual violence and abuse (TFSVA) refers to a range of behaviours in which digital technologies are used to facilitate both virtual and face-to-face sexual harm. The proliferation of smartphone usage and increasing internet penetration rates across the world have made it easier for individuals to become perpetrators and victims of TFSVA. Since empirical studies of TFSVA remain limited in the academic arena, and there is an absence of evidence to support the development of a standardised TFSVA measurement, this review aims to explore what TFSVA measurements are currently available and their potential use in measuring TFSVA. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This scoping review will be structured according to the Joanna Briggs Institute recommended framework. Keywords related to 'technology', 'sexual violence' and 'measure' will be used. Any paper related to measurements of TFSVA will be included without limitation to any population or setting. A search will be conducted from database inception until May 2024 for published literature in English and Chinese electronic databases, which included PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, Scopus, ProQuest, Web of Science, Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure, SinoMed, Index to Taiwan Periodical Literature and Ariti Library. Screening and study selection will be conducted by two independent reviewers. Data will be extracted and reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews Checklist. The PAGER (Patterns, Advances, Gaps, Evidence for practice and Research recommendations) Framework will be used to report the findings. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Since the scoping review methodology consists of reviewing and collecting data from publicly available materials, this study does not require ethics approval. This scoping review has the potential to serve as the most appropriate way to explore existing evidence related to this emerging phenomenon. The results of this review are expected to highlight various types of TFSVA measurement developed in different settings. Further work is required to develop measurements adapted for specific populations and tested to ensure acceptability and cultural competence. The results will be disseminated through a peer-reviewed publication and conference presentations. REVIEW REGISTRATION: The protocol of this review was registered within the Open Science Framework (https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/Q5ETW) on 13 March 2024.
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.