MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2938655883 · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2018-025741

Children’s and caregivers’ perspectives about mandatory reporting of child maltreatment: a meta-synthesis of qualitative studies

2019· article· en· W2938655883 on OpenAlexafffund
Jill R. McTavish, Melissa Kimber, Karen Devries, Manuela Colombini, Jennifer C. D. MacGregor, C. Nadine Wathen, Harriet L. MacMillan

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Open · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicChild Abuse and Trauma
Canadian institutionsWestern UniversityMcMaster University
FundersInstitute of Neurosciences, Mental Health and AddictionInstitute of Gender and HealthCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchMcMaster UniversityVedecká Grantová Agentúra MŠVVaŠ SR a SAVPublic Health AgencyPublic Health Agency of Canada
KeywordsPsycINFOCritical appraisalMedicineQualitative researchMEDLINEData extractionHealth careChecklistNursingPoison controlQualitative propertyChild abuseSuicide preventionFamily medicinePsychologyAlternative medicineMedical emergency

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To systematically synthesise qualitative research that explores children's and caregivers' perceptions of mandatory reporting. DESIGN: We conducted a meta-synthesis of qualitative studies. DATA SOURCES: Searches were conducted in Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Criminal Justice Abstracts, Education Resources Information Center, Sociological Abstracts and Cochrane Libraries. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: English-language, primary, qualitative studies that investigated children's or caregivers' perceptions of reporting child maltreatment were included. All healthcare and social service settings implicated by mandatory reporting laws were included. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Critical appraisal of included studies involved a modified checklist from the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP). Two independent reviewers extracted data, including direct quotations from children and caregivers (first-order constructs) and interpretations by study authors (second-order constructs). Third-order constructs (the findings of this meta-synthesis) involved synthesising second-order constructs that addressed strategies to improve the mandatory reporting processes for children or caregivers-especially when these themes addressed concerns raised by children or caregivers in relation to the reporting process. RESULTS: Over 7935 citations were retrieved and 35 articles were included in this meta-synthesis. The studies represent the views of 821 caregivers, 50 adults with histories of child maltreatment and 28 children. Findings suggest that children and caregivers fear being reported, as well as the responses to reports. Children and caregivers identified a need for improvement in communication from healthcare providers about mandatory reporting, offering preliminary insight into child-driven and caregiver-driven strategies to mitigate potential harms associated with reporting processes. CONCLUSION: Research on strategies to mitigate potential harms linked to mandatory reporting is urgently needed, as is research that explores children's experiences with this process.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.535
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.187
GPT teacher head0.472
Teacher spread0.284 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations63
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJ OpenSame topicChild Abuse and TraumaFrench-language works237,207