"So Why Should I Call Them?": Survivor Support Service Characteristics as Drivers of Help-Seeking in India.

Women in South Asia face the highest lifetime prevalence of intimate partner violence in the world, which is just one form of violence against women (VAW). In India, few women seek help after experiencing violence, particularly from formal resources, such as physicians or the police. While many studies have investigated the impact of survivor characteristics and patterns of violence on help-seeking behaviors, there is scant research on support service characteristics and their impact on help-seeking. The introduction of a novel crisis helpline in Gujarat, India provided an opportunity to better understand how successful help-seeking can be driven by the perceived and experienced characteristics of the helpline. We conducted in-depth interviews with helpline users to identify factors and pathways that promoted or discouraged help-seeking in general, help-seeking from a formal source, and help-seeking from this particular helpline. We analyzed 32 interviews of women who used the helpline. Participants were from eight districts across the state, representing a diverse range of sociodemographic backgrounds. After conducting a thematic analysis, we found that action-oriented service, timeliness, and women-focused staff influenced (positively and negatively) participants' feelings of safety, empowerment, and trust in the helpline, which ultimately impacted their decision to seek help from the helpline or even to seek help at all. This study illuminates how service characteristics, in and of themselves, can influence the likelihood that survivors will seek help, emphasizing the need for survivors to have a voice in the growth and refinement of VAW support services. Consequently, these areas must be a focus of future research and initiatives to improve help-seeking by VAW survivors.

Evaluating the Effect of Concussion-Education Programs on Intent to Report Concussion in High School Football.

CONTEXT: Concussion underreporting leads to delays in diagnosis and treatment, prolonging recovery time. Athletes' self-reporting of concussion symptoms, therefore, reduces risk. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness of 3 concussion-education programs in improving concussion-reporting intention. DESIGN: Randomized controlled clinical trial. SETTING: Three high schools in California. PATIENTS OR OTHER PARTICIPANTS: A total of 118 male football players (age = 14.88 ± 1.19 years). INTERVENTION(S): Participants were randomly assigned to receive concussion education via CrashCourse (CC), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) video education materials (CDC-Vi), or CDC written education materials (CDC-Wr). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): The primary outcome was concussion-reporting intention, which was assessed at baseline, immediately after education, and at 1-month follow-up. Secondary outcomes were concussion knowledge, concussion-reporting attitudes, perceived concussion-reporting norms, and perceived behavioral control. RESULTS: Across all education formats, a total sample of athletes improved in concussion-reporting intention at immediate and 1-month follow-ups (mean improvements = 6.8% and 11.4%, respectively; F4,224 = 11.1, P < .001). Similar findings were observed across all education formats in secondary analyses examining knowledge, attitudes, and perceived behavioral control. However, we noted differences in concussion-reporting intention by education format and time (F4,224 = 2.8, P = .03). Post hoc analysis showed that athletes who received CC had increased concussion-reporting intentions at immediate and 1-month follow-ups (baseline = 4.7, immediate follow-up = 6.1, 1-month follow-up = 6.0; F16,61.1 = 6.1, P = .007) compared with increases only at 1-month follow-up for CDC-Vi (baseline = 4.3, immediate follow-up = 5.2, 1-month follow-up = 5.8; F1.6,61.6 = 8.4, P = .001) and no improvement for CDC-Wr (P = .10). Secondary analyses indicated differences between CC and both CDC interventions in concussion knowledge and attitudes at immediate and 1-month follow-ups. We identified no differences in perceived behavioral control among interventions (F4,216 = 0.2, P = .93) or perceived concussion-reporting norms across (F4,224 = 0.3, P = .73) or among (F4,224 = 1.7, P = .15) interventions. CONCLUSIONS: All athletes exhibited an improved intent to report concussions, increased concussion knowledge, better concussion attitudes, and more perceived behavioral control at both immediate and 1-month follow-ups. However, athletes randomized to receive CC reported a greater intent to report concussion, more knowledge, and improved concussion-reporting attitudes when compared with those who received CDC-Vi and CDC-Wr.