ArticleBMC pediatrics2012
Facilitators and barriers to screening for child abuse in the emergency department.
Article in BMC pediatrics, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
17 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 74 citations in OpenAlex.
- Screening tools used by paediatric healthcare providers to identify child maltreatment by parents or caregivers: a systematic review.BMJ open · 2025Pooled it
- Walking Children Through a Minefield: How Professionals Experience Exploring Adverse Childhood Experiences.Qualitative health research · 2018Pooled it
- Is early detection of abused children possible?: a systematic review of the diagnostic accuracy of the identification of abused children.BMC pediatrics · 2013Pooled it
- Improving the recognition of child maltreatment in emergency departments in Europe: healthcare professionals' perceived barriers and facilitators for implementation of a comprehensive toolkit design.European journal of pediatrics · 2026Article
- Enhancing implementation and compliance of the Screening Instrument for Child Abuse and Neglect (SCAN) in emergency departments in the Netherlands.BMJ paediatrics open · 2026Observational
- The CHILD safeguarding simulation study: Co-designed cHild-centred Interprofessional Learning through Dialogue for healthcare professionals.Advances in simulation (London, England) · 2026Article
- One size fits all? A latent profile analysis to identify care professional subgroups based on implementation determinants.Implementation science communications · 2025Article
- Expert consensus on multilevel implementation hypotheses to promote the uptake of youth care guidelines: a Delphi study.Health research policy and systems · 2024Article
- Article
- Understanding the roles of the healthcare and child welfare systems in promoting the safety and well-being of children.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2023Article
- A Qualitative Description of Resident Physicians' Understanding of Child Maltreatment: Impacts, Recognition, and Response.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- A systematic review and meta-analysis of failure to take history as a barrier of reporting child abuse by dentists in private and state clinics.Dental research journal · 2021Review
- Recognition of child maltreatment in emergency departments in Europe: Should we do better?PloS one · 2021Article
- Leveraging emergency department visits to connect older adults at risk for malnutrition and food insecurity to community resources: design and protocol development for the BRIDGE study.Pilot and feasibility studies · 2020Article
- Detection of the awareness rate of abuse in pediatric patients admitted to emergency medicine department with injury.Turkish journal of emergency medicine · 2016Article
- A national survey on the use of screening tools to detect physical child abuse.Pediatric surgery international · 2016Article
- Clinical and Epidemiological Characteristics of Suspected Child Maltreatment Reported After Caregiver Emergency Department Visits in Japan.Acute medicine & surgeryArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTo identify facilitators of, and barriers to, screening for child abuse in emergency departments (ED) through interviews with ED staff, members of the hospital Board, and related experts.
methodsThis qualitative study is based on semi-structured interviews with 27 professionals from seven Dutch hospitals (i.e. seven pediatricians, two surgeons, six ED nurses, six ED managers and six hospital Board members). The resulting list of facilitators/barriers was subsequently discussed with five experts in child abuse and one implementation expert. The results are ordered using the Child Abuse Framework of the Dutch Health Care Inspectorate that legally requires screening for child abuse.
resultsLack of knowledge of child abuse, communication with parents in the case of suspected abuse, and lack of time for development of policy and cases are barriers for ED staff to screen for child abuse. For Board members, lack of means and time, and a high turnover of ED staff are impediments to improving their child abuse policy. Screening can be promoted by training ED staff to better recognize child abuse, improving communication skills, appointing an attendant specifically for child abuse, explicit support of the screening policy by management, and by national implementation of an approved protocol and validated screening instrument.
conclusionsED staff are motivated to work according to the Dutch Health Care Inspectorate requirements but experiences many barriers, particularly communication with parents of children suspected of being abused. Introduction of a national child abuse protocol can improve screening on child abuse at EDs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.