ReviewPediatric radiology2014
International issues in abusive head trauma.
Review in Pediatric radiology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 28 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Abusive Head Trauma in Infants and Children in Japan.Journal of Korean Neurosurgical Society · 2022Article
- Long-term impact of abusive head trauma in young children: Outcomes at 5 and 11 years old.Journal of pediatric surgery · 2021Article
- Article
- Pediatric abusive head trauma.Biomedical journal · 2020Review
- Parents' experiences of seeking health care and encountering allegations of shaken baby syndrome: A qualitative study.PloS one · 2020Article
- Medical diagnoses among infants at entry in out-of-home care: A Swedish population-register study.Health science reports · 2019Article
- Infant abuse diagnosis associated with abusive head trauma criteria: incidence increase due to overdiagnosis?European journal of public health · 2018Article
- Imaging of Abusive Trauma.Indian journal of pediatrics · 2016Review
- Childhood non-accidental traumatic brain injuries.African journal of paediatric surgery : AJPSArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 4 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In the decades since Dr. John Caffey described a series of children with chronic subdural hematoma and long bone fractures, there has been a substantial increase in the medical recognition of various forms child abuse. In the United States, the term shaken baby syndrome was coined to explain a constellation of injuries assumed to be the result of violent shaking of infants. After improved understanding of the variety of mechanisms that occur when children are abused, abusive head trauma (AHT) has become the recommended terminology. AHT is a more comprehensive term that reflects the brain injuries that children suffer as the result of abuse. AHT continues to include shaking as a mechanism of injury as well as shaking with impact, impact alone, crushing injuries or combinations of several mechanisms. The medical community in the United States has led the way in developing new terminology and research to describe this unique and devastating form of abuse. The globalization of medicine and rapid information transfer has resulted in AHT becoming well-recognized internationally as a form of serious and fatal child abuse. This paper will review the historical basis in the United States for the diagnosis of AHT. We will also review some of the current international issue in epidemiology, diagnosis, legal processes and outcomes in selected countries/regions where child abuse physicians are actively involved in the evaluation of AHT.
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.