ArticleArchives of disease in childhood2015
The unseen child and safeguarding: 'Did not attend' guidelines in the NHS.
Article in Archives of disease in childhood, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Recognition of risk and prevention in safeguarding of children and young people: a mapping review and component analysis of service development interventions aimed at health and social care professionals.BMC health services research · 2021Review
- Service- and practitioner-level variation in non-consensual dropout from child mental health services.European child & adolescent psychiatry · 2020Article
- Development and evaluation of a 'was not brought' pathway: a team approach to managing children's missed dental appointments.British dental journal · 2019Article
- Challenges of Eye Health Care in Children and Strategies to Improve Treatment Uptake: A Qualitative Study from the Perspective of Eye Care Professionals in the UK.The British and Irish orthoptic journal · 2019Article
- Characteristics of children who do not attend their hospital appointments, and GPs' response: a mixed methods study in primary and secondary care.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundOrganisations in England's National Health Service (NHS) are required to have 'did not attend' (DNA) guidelines to help deal with the 'unseen child'.
aimsTo map DNA and associated guidelines in paediatric services, examine differences in safeguarding response and advice in the guidelines and explore the experience of guideline users.
methodsA mapping approach was used to locate current DNA guidelines on English NHS organisations' websites. Analysis of the guidelines was supplemented with qualitative data from those who produce, monitor or use them.
resultsFewer than 8% of English NHS organisations had up-to-date guidelines in the public domain, though a further 41% stated that they had a DNA/similar policy in place or had an out-of-date guideline on their website. Advice to healthcare providers about the steps to take when a child DNAs fell into five categories: reflection and review; direct interaction with the family; indirect interaction with the family; liaison with internal colleagues; and external referral. Interviews with eight individuals led to the identification of four themes. The management of information flows was central to the effective management of DNA. Respondents also reported seeking support and advice from others. While all respondents spoke about the importance of supporting the family, the child's needs were central to dealing with non-attendance, and respondents demonstrated awareness of wider risk discourses.
conclusionsWe consider the implications of the work and suggest that evidence-informed guidelines developed nationally but tailored to specific services might be helpful for providers and users alike.
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.