Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33583967›Full record

ArticleClinical social work journal2021

Decision-Making and Relationship Competence When Reporting Suspected Physical Abuse and Child Neglect: An Objective Structured Clinical Evaluation.

Lea Tufford, Barbara Lee, Marion Bogo, Elizabeth Wenghofer, Cassandra Etherington, Vivian Thieu, Rose Zhao

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical social work journal, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 19% of its field
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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. 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

7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Lea TuffordSchool of Rural and Northern Health, Laurentian University, 935 Ramsey Lake Road, Sudbury, ON P3E 2C6 Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-6286-4379
Barbara LeeSchool of Social Work, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada.ORCID 0000-0003-2671-3650
Marion BogoFactor-Inwentash Faculty of Social Work, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.
Elizabeth WenghoferSchool of Rural and Northern Health, Laurentian University, 935 Ramsey Lake Road, Sudbury, ON P3E 2C6 Canada.
Cassandra Etherington *School of Rural and Northern Health, Laurentian University, 935 Ramsey Lake Road, Sudbury, ON P3E 2C6 Canada.
Vivian Thieu *School of Social Work, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada.
Rose Zhao *School of Social Work, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada.
Laurentian University · CAUniversity of British Columbia · CAUniversity of Toronto · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Mandatory reporting of suspected child abuse and neglect highlights the challenges between the ethical and legal obligations of social workers and the need to maintain the therapeutic relationship with the client. The ability to bridge this tension is paramount to ensure continued psychosocial treatment and the well-being of children. This paper discusses a study to determine the decision-making factors of social work students and practitioners when facing a suspicion of child abuse and neglect, how they justify their decision to report or not report to child protection services, and the current and future relationship repair strategies used with simulated clients during an objective structured clinical evaluation (OSCE). Nineteen BSW, MSW, and experienced practitioners (N = 19) underwent an OSCE with one of two child maltreatment vignettes, physical abuse or neglect. Fisher's exact test was used to examine participants' historical and current reporting behaviors. Independent samples T-tests, Cohen's D, and qualitative content analysis was used to examine participants' decision making and relationship repair strategies when faced with suspected child abuse and neglect. Results showed that six participants discussed the duty to report during the OSCE while 13 participants did not. Participants' who discussed and did not discuss the duty to report during the OSCE articulated clear reasons for their decision and identified relationship repair strategies in working with the client. A sub-group of participants who identified the child maltreatment but did not discuss the duty to report, provided more tentative and complex reasons for their inaction and next steps in working with the client. All participants demonstrated a degree of competence and critical reflection in the OSCE, with integration for future learning. These findings are discussed and implications for future practice are offered.

Indexed as

Decision-makingMandatory reportingNeglectPhysical abuseSimulationTherapeutic relationship

Identifiers

PMID33583967
PMCPMC7864800
OpenAlexW3128384903

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.