Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29777320›Full record

ReviewCurrent psychiatry reports2018

Ethical Issues in Conducting Research With Children and Families Affected by Disasters.

Regardt J Ferreira, Fred Buttell, Clare Cannon

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Current psychiatry reports, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Regardt J FerreiraTulane School of Social Work, 127 Elk Place, New Orleans, LA, 70118, USA. rferrei@tulane.edu.
Fred ButtellTulane School of Social Work, 127 Elk Place, New Orleans, LA, 70118, USA.
Clare CannonDepartment of Social Work, University of the Free State, Bloemfontein, South Africa.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purpose of reviewWe review topical evidence on ethical issues in conducting disaster research with children and families affected by natural disasters, with an emphasis on analyzing specific vulnerabilities associated with children and families affected by disasters, identifying significant findings and trends of ethical guidelines and approaches, and discussing key observations into ethical research in a disaster setting. RECENT

findingsCurrent evidence indicates that there is a wide range of research methods for child disaster studies. Vulnerability as a concept in child disaster studies is more prevalent with several scholars underscoring the need for an ethical approach to disaster research. Current disaster research evidence suggests that there is specifically an interest in conducting disaster research with children and families. With the increase in investigations, it is strongly recommended that investigators adhere to ethical standards in research practice when conducting research with vulnerable populations (e.g., children) within a postdisaster context.

Indexed as

Child WelfareEthics, ResearchFamilyNatural DisastersStress, PsychologicalAdultChildHumansResearch DesignVulnerable PopulationsChildren and familiesDisaster researchDisaster research ethicsEthicsInstitutional review boardsSocial vulnerability

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.