ArticleForensic science, medicine, and pathology2026
Survivor experiences of forensic and legal processes after sexual assault: an exploratory mixed-methods study of participants recruited through Middle Eastern support networks.
Article in Forensic science, medicine, and pathology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Effective forensic and legal responses to sexual assault require reliable evidence collection and respectful, fair procedures. This exploratory mixed-methods study examined psychological distress, cooperation with forensic procedures, legal-process satisfaction, and contextual experiences among survivors recruited through advocacy and legal-aid networks across multiple Middle Eastern jurisdictions. Fifty adult survivors (34 women and 16 men) completed study-specific single-item ratings of psychological distress and cooperation on 10-point scales and satisfaction on a five-point scale, followed by semi-structured interviews. Quantitative data were summarized. Gender differences were examined using Mann-Whitney U tests, and the distress-satisfaction association was assessed using Spearman's rank correlation. Interviews underwent thematic analysis and integration during interpretation. Mean scores were 7.72 (SD = 1.20) for distress, 6.68 (SD = 1.71) for cooperation, and 3.26 (SD = 1.17) for satisfaction. Satisfaction ratings of 4-5 were reported by 44% of participants, 30% selected the midpoint, and 26% selected ratings of 1-2. Cooperation did not differ significantly by gender (U = 349.0, p = 0.106), and distress was not significantly associated with satisfaction (ρ = -0.11, p = 0.459). Qualitative themes included trauma during evidence collection, shame and stigma, perceptions of justice, professional support, privacy concerns, and service-access challenges. Some male participants emphasized anticipated disbelief, masculinity-related stigma, and social judgment. Cooperation, distress, and satisfaction represented distinct dimensions of survivor experience. The findings support trauma-informed, context-responsive practices emphasizing continuing consent, clear communication, privacy, professional sensitivity, and equitable access while maintaining evidentiary standards.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42640511What 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.