ArticlePediatric quality & safety
Improving Physical Abuse Documentation and Photography through a Remote Peer Review Intervention.
Article in Pediatric quality & safety. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- A Standardized Peer Review Program Improves Assessment and Documentation of Child Sexual Abuse.Pediatric quality & safetyArticle
- Timely Recognition of Abusive Injuries (TRAIN): Results from a Statewide Quality Improvement Collaborative.Pediatric quality & safetyArticle
- Improving Diagnostic Quality of Anogenital Photodocumentation in Emergency Department Evaluations for Acute Child Sexual Assault.Pediatric quality & safetyArticle
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 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Child Abuse Pediatrics is a small and geographically dispersed specialty. This article reports on an intervention to improve written and photodocumentation quality and uniformity in suspected child physical abuse cases, using a remote, de-identified case review system.
methodsIn each cycle, participants submitted de-identified medical reports and photographs for review by a child abuse pediatrics expert. Experts evaluated 3 cycles of 5 cases using a novel rubric and assigned quality interventions for the participants based on their scores.
results15 of 16 participants improved scores between cycles 1 and 3 (78% versus 89%,
conclusionA quality improvement project administered via the internet improves the quality and uniformity of written and photographic documentation in child physical abuse evaluations.
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.