Systematic review of child maltreatment screening tools used by different occupational groups: a study protocol DOI Creative Commons

Denise Colley,

Jenny Seidler,

Philipp Rollbühler

et al.

BMJ Open, Journal Year: 2024, Volume and Issue: 14(11), P. e089623 - e089623

Published: Nov. 1, 2024

Background Child maltreatment (CM) encompasses physical, emotional or sexual abuse, physical emotional/psychological neglect intimate partner (or domestic) violence and is associated with adverse cognitive, behavioural, social outcomes that often continue shaping adulthood. The early valid detection of CM essential to initiate treatment intervention as well avoid continued against the child. Various occupational groups, such healthcare providers, teachers, workers, psychotherapists others, encounter maltreated children in their professional settings. Systematic reviews on instruments assess suspected report retrospective measurement via caregiver’s child’s self-report are frequently limited health system a setting. purpose this Preferred Reporting Items for Reviews Meta-Analyses-compliant systematic review synthesise evidence psychometric properties at presentation broad range different groups who work inside outside system. Method A search will be performed Scopus, PsycInfo, Medline Web Science no limit earliest publication until January 2022. Eligibility criteria include studies investigate adolescents under 18 years by proxy. After independent screening two reviewers, quality assessment data extraction using an adaptation COnsensus‐based Standards selection Measurement INstruments Risk Bias checklist, Strengthening Observational Studies Epidemiology: Explanation Elaboration Downs Black checklist measuring study quality. Screening, done Covidence. results presented narrative form and, if adequate, meta-analysis performed. Discussion This aims give overview designed screen proxies. interest need information about methodological characteristics make decisions best-suited tool specific purpose. Furthermore, support development novel might improve existing ones. Ethics dissemination approval not required. submitted peer-reviewed journal. PROSPERO registration number CRD42022297997.

Language: Английский

Balancing child participation and protection in emergency cases: Ensuring the child’s best interests DOI
May Gresdahl, Anita Skårstad Storhaug,

Halvor Fauske

et al.

Children and Youth Services Review, Journal Year: 2025, Volume and Issue: unknown, P. 108259 - 108259

Published: March 1, 2025

Language: Английский

Citations

0
Systematic review of child maltreatment screening tools used by different occupational groups: a study protocol DOI Creative Commons

Denise Colley,

Jenny Seidler,

Philipp Rollbühler

et al.

BMJ Open, Journal Year: 2024, Volume and Issue: 14(11), P. e089623 - e089623

Published: Nov. 1, 2024

Background Child maltreatment (CM) encompasses physical, emotional or sexual abuse, physical emotional/psychological neglect intimate partner (or domestic) violence and is associated with adverse cognitive, behavioural, social outcomes that often continue shaping adulthood. The early valid detection of CM essential to initiate treatment intervention as well avoid continued against the child. Various occupational groups, such healthcare providers, teachers, workers, psychotherapists others, encounter maltreated children in their professional settings. Systematic reviews on instruments assess suspected report retrospective measurement via caregiver’s child’s self-report are frequently limited health system a setting. purpose this Preferred Reporting Items for Reviews Meta-Analyses-compliant systematic review synthesise evidence psychometric properties at presentation broad range different groups who work inside outside system. Method A search will be performed Scopus, PsycInfo, Medline Web Science no limit earliest publication until January 2022. Eligibility criteria include studies investigate adolescents under 18 years by proxy. After independent screening two reviewers, quality assessment data extraction using an adaptation COnsensus‐based Standards selection Measurement INstruments Risk Bias checklist, Strengthening Observational Studies Epidemiology: Explanation Elaboration Downs Black checklist measuring study quality. Screening, done Covidence. results presented narrative form and, if adequate, meta-analysis performed. Discussion This aims give overview designed screen proxies. interest need information about methodological characteristics make decisions best-suited tool specific purpose. Furthermore, support development novel might improve existing ones. Ethics dissemination approval not required. submitted peer-reviewed journal. PROSPERO registration number CRD42022297997.

Language: Английский

Citations

0