(135) CASE REPORT OF SEXUAL VIOLENCE VICTIMS PRESENTING PHYSICAL AND PSYCHOPATHOLOGICAL SYMPTOMS: DO THE LIFETIME OF ABUSE, SOCIAL SUPPORT, AND TIMING OF TREATMENT MATTER?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Introduction The consequences of experiencing sexual violence (SV) are linked to the time in life when it occurred and the relationship with the perpetrator. The connections among receiving late social support and treatment with worsening of SV outcomes need more clarification. These are three case reports describing SV episodes occurred in childhood or adolescence and their psychological and physical consequences. Objective Description of three case reports of SV occurred in childhood or adolescence and their psychological and physical consequences. Methods Description of sociodemographic data, psychiatric assessment (Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview (MINI) – Brazilian Version 5.0.0), SV episode and adverse childhood experiences - ACE (Childhood Trauma Questionnaire-CTQ), emotional and stress-related symptoms (Depression Anxiety Stress Scale - DASS-21; Difficulties in Emotion Regulation Scale - DERS; Dissociative Experiences Scale - DES; Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Checklist for DSM-5 - PCL-5; Tonic Immobility Scale -TIS) and physical characteristics regarding pain and muscle rigidity (McGuill Pain Questionaire -SF, Stibor and Schober tests, fleximeter, exploratory palpation) of three victims of SV, enrolled in a referral psychiatric-medical center. Results In these three cases (case A and B female; case C male), the SV occurred at childhood (cases A and B) and adolescence (case C), with a minimum period of five years for SV disclosure, neither one with early medical/social support. In addition to SV, at least one ACE (CTQ) was found: emotional abuse (case A = 19; case B = 15; case C = 16; cutoff = 9), emotional neglect (A = 23; B = 23; C = 10; cutoff = 10), physical abuse (A = 15; B = 13; C = 10; cutoff = 8) and physical neglect (A = 12; B = 11; C = 9; cutoff = 8). Regarding psychopathological aspects we found symptoms of stress (A = 20;B < 10;C = 20;cutoff = 10), depression (A = 22; B = 20; C = 22;cutoff = 10) and anxiety (A = 8; B < 8; C = 12; cutoff = 8) – DASS-21; high scores of PTSD – PCL5 (A = 55; B = 55:C = 57;cutoff = 33); dissociative symptoms - DES (A = 96,5; B = 45,14; C = 156,5; cutoff = 30); moderate (36-65%) to severe (66-90%) difficulties in emotion regulation - DERS (A = 66,45%; B = 44,37%; C = 72,57%). In psychiatric assessment (Case B and C) beyond the classic symptoms of PTSD (guilty, dissociation, dodge, avoidance, and interpersonal harm), symptoms of emotional dysregulation (self-mutilation and dysphoria) characteristic of complex PTSD, dullness and impoverish ideas (Case A), stand out. Regarding physical-somatic symptoms, we found high score of tonic immobility reaction -TIS (A = 29; B < 21:C = 42;cutoff = 21); pain complaints (A = 22; B = 31; C = 25; score = 0-45), muscle rigidity in the axial axis inferred by Stibor test (A = positive; B = negative; C = negative), Schober test (A = positive; B = negative; C = positive) and reduced range of cervical flexion (A = 43°; B = 34°; C ≥ 65°; normal 65°), extension (A ≥ 50°; B = 33°; C = 48°, normal 50°). Through palpatory exploration, the pain was mainly localized in the pelvic (psoas and iliac) and respiratory (diaphragm) muscles. Conclusions The physical and psychopathological findings in these case reports seems to be in line with literature evidence of a higher frequency of pain and psychopathological symptoms in victims of SV in childhood–adolescence. The lack of early medical/social support appears to increase the severity of the outcomes. It highlights the need for more comprehensive therapeutic approach, integrating physiotherapists, clinicians, and mental health professionals, and early investigation by health care providers. Disclosure No.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".