Many of Jimmy Savile's victims were ignored or laughed at when they revealed at the time that he had sexually abused them, a report has found.
Others stayed silent because they were convinced they would not be believed as Savile was such a powerful and influential character.
Some victims were even told they were "lucky someone like Savile had paid them attention", according to the NSPCC report.
A significant number of the men and women interviewed have still not confided in friends and family about the abuse, the children's charity said.
Savile died aged 84 in October 2011 - a year before allegations that he had sexually abused children were broadcast in an ITV documentary.
The revelations prompted hundreds of victims to come forward with claims that they were attacked at BBC premises or in other institutions, including hospitals.
According to the report, Would They Actually Have Believed Me?, some of the victims, who were aged between eight and 26 when Savile assaulted them, told hospital staff, who dismissed their claims.
One of the 26 victims interviewed by NSPCC counsellors went to the police but no action was taken.
The NSPCC said the research, which was commissioned by Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Constabulary, highlighted the "devastating scars" that victims had suffered from the abuse, with some turning to drink and drugs to cope. Others have suffered mental illness, poor relationships or contemplated suicide, it said.
According to the report, victims had "largely positive experiences" when they finally went to the police after Scotland Yard launched Operation Yewtree in the wake of the TV expose about Savile.
But they wanted to see improvements, including new ways to report sexual abuse and additional specialist training for officers receiving and investigating allegations to ensure they fully appreciate the long-term emotional impact of the crime, the NSPCC said.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article