Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 3 de 3
Filtrar
Mais filtros










Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
J Interpers Violence ; 37(13-14): NP10832-NP10861, 2022 07.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33509038

RESUMO

The treatment homicide co-victims receive from the criminal justice system often leaves them aggrieved and feeling alienated. A neglected but important area of investigation is the courtroom workgroup's handling of murder cases. This exploratory study examines the nature and extent to which varying secondary victimization experiences are common among co-victims as the murder cases are processed through the court system. The sample consists of 27 co-victims connected to 24 separate cases where the murders occurred in a major metropolitan area in the southeastern United States. Drawing upon focus group data, Nvivo 10 was employed to identify themes that illustrate common secondary victimization experiences among co-victims along with positive and mixed reactions to court processes and personnel. The findings indicate that court requirements to provide notifications are infrequently met and attorney's practice to supply information about case progress and counseling to family members regarding plea-bargaining and sentencing decisions are greatly restrictive. When information is offered, it is often perceived as highly technical and when assistance is provided, it is frequently limited or intermittent. Despite the prevalence of negative experiences, there also were reports of positive interactions with the district attorney and victim advocates. The study concludes by identifying ways in which the courtroom workgroup can uphold the rights afforded to co-victims while at the same time meeting the duties and responsibilities of the workgroup.


Assuntos
Bullying , Vítimas de Crime , Vítimas de Crime/psicologia , Pesar , Homicídio/psicologia , Humanos , Aplicação da Lei
2.
Med J Aust ; 188(4): 235-7, 2008 Feb 18.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-18279132

RESUMO

As part of the 3E program, we conducted a systematic literature review and gathered consensus from 23 practising Australian rheumatologists to develop guidelines for early identification of ankylosing spondylitis and specialist referral. In three rounds of break-out sessions followed by discussion and voting, the specialist panel addressed three questions related to diagnosis of ankylosing spondylitis: In individuals with back pain, what are the early clinical features that suggest ankylosing spondylitis? How useful is imaging in identifying early ankylosing spondylitis? Based on which clinical features should a general practitioner refer a patient to a rheumatologist for further evaluation? The panel agreed on six recommendations related to the three questions: 1a. Early clinical features to suggest ankylosing spondylitis include inflammatory back pain and age at symptom onset < 45 years. 1b. The absence of symptomatic response to an appropriate course of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs makes the diagnosis of ankylosing spondylitis less likely. 1c. Raised inflammatory markers are supportive, but their absence does not rule out the diagnosis of ankylosing spondylitis. 2a. Despite low sensitivity to detect changes of early ankylosing spondylitis, plain radiographs of the pelvis and spine are appropriate initial imaging techniques. 2b. Magnetic resonance imaging is a useful imaging modality for detecting early changes of ankylosing spondylitis. 3. Individuals with inflammatory back pain should be referred to a rheumatologist for further evaluation. Effective dissemination and implementation of these recommendations are important to standardise the approach to early diagnosis of ankylosing spondylitis.


Assuntos
Espondilite Anquilosante/diagnóstico , Austrália , Diagnóstico Precoce , Medicina Baseada em Evidências , Humanos
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA
...