- 121 - result of the violations established in this judgment, taking into consideration their gender particularities and case history.448 Thus, the Court requires the State to provide, free of charge and on a priority basis, medical treatment for the eleven women victims in this case, which must include the provision of medication and, if applicable, transportation and other necessary and directly related expenses.449 In addition, this must be provided, insofar as possible, in the health centers nearest to their places of residence, 450 for as long as necessary. The Court also requires the State to provide, free of charge and on a priority basis, immediate and appropriate psychological or psychiatric treatment to the victims who request this, including the free supply of any medication they may require, through its specialized health care institutions. When providing the psychological and/or psychiatric treatment, the particular circumstances and needs of each victim should be considered, as agreed with each of them following an individual evaluation. 451 The beneficiaries of these measures have six months from notification of this judgment to inform the State of their desire to received psychological and/or psychiatric treatment, 452 and the State has three months from reception of the said request, to provide the psychological and/or psychiatric treatment requested. D.2 Measures of satisfaction D.2.a Publication and dissemination of the judgment 342. The representatives asked the Court to require the State to publish the official summary of the judgment in two of the newspapers with the most widespread circulation in the country, and in the most widely read newspaper in the state of Mexico. In addition, they asked that the complete judgment be published on “the websites of the Office of the Presidency, the PGR, the Governor of the state of Mexico and the PGJEM” for one year, on the opening page of these sites, “evident on opening the website, either the text itself or a direct link to the text”; and then be stored “permanently” in the section on international judgments and/or human rights. Regarding the publication on official websites, the representatives clarified that their objective was that it be published by the most senior levels of the State, in order to achieve the greatest dissemination of the message to internet users. 343. The State asked that, if the Court decided to grant this measures, it be allowed to publish the judgment on the website of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and not on that of the Presidency of Cf. Case of Barrios Altos v. Peru. Reparations and costs. Judgment of November 30, 2001. Series C No. 87, para. 42 and 45; Case of I.V. v. Bolivia. Preliminary objections, merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of November 30, 2016. Series C No. 329, para. 332, and Case of López Soto et al. v. Venezuela. Merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of September 26, 2018. Series C No. 362, para. 291. 448 Cf. Case of Poblete Vilches et al. v. Chile. Merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of March 8, 2018. Series C No. 349, para. 231. 449 Cf. Case of the Las Dos Erres Massacre v. Guatemala. Preliminary objection, merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of November 24, 2009. Series C No. 211, para. 270; Case of Ortiz Hernández et al. v. Venezuela. Merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of August 22, 2017. Series C No. 338, para. 199, and Case of Cuscul Pivaral et al. v. Guatemala. Preliminary objection, merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of August 23, 2018. Series C No. 359, para. 211. 450 Cf. Case of the Las Dos Erres Massacre v. Guatemala. Preliminary objection, merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of November 24, 2009. Series C No. 211, para. 270; Case of Ortiz Hernández et al. v. Venezuela. Merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of August 22, 2017. Series C No. 338, para. 199, and Case of López Soto et al. v. Venezuela. Merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of September 26, 2018. Series C No. 362, para. 296. 451 Cf. Case of Rosendo Cantú et al. v. Mexico. Preliminary objection, merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of August 31, 2010. Series C No. 216, para. 253; Case of Ortiz Hernández et al. v. Venezuela. Merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of August 22, 2017. Series C No. 338, para. 199, and Case of López Soto et al. v. Venezuela. Merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of September 26, 2018. Series C No. 362, para. 293. 452