ArticleChild abuse & neglect2022
Child protection plans in the COVID-19 pandemic in Germany: Maintained, adjusted, or suspended?
Article in Child abuse & neglect, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- [Relational dealing with crisis of youth welfare professionals in casework regarding the effects of the Covid 19 pandemic].Zeitschrift fur Erziehungswissenschaft : ZfE · 2023Article
- [Learning from the coronavirus pandemic about the future of family support services].Pravention und Gesundheitsforderung · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCOVID-19 infection prevention measures have enhanced risks of abuse and neglect for children and youth. Simultaneously, they have affected the practice of child protection, especially impacting the social infrastructure on which child protection work tends to rely, as well as the ability of practitioners to meet with family members face-to-face and in their homes.
objectivesThis article focuses on the ways in which infection prevention measures have shaped child protection plans in Germany, i.e. family support and counselling, which is accompanied by monitoring and scrutiny.
methodsThe article is based on a qualitative study, in which 40 semi-structured interviews were held with first-line management representatives of German Youth Welfare Agencies between July and October 2020.
resultsThe study's results show that protection plans have either been maintained, modified or (temporarily) suspended. Several influencing factors were identified. First, the extent to which the social infrastructure relevant for child protection could be maintained, or emerging gaps be filled in a timely fashion by child and youth welfare organisations. Second, the degree of effectiveness of the working relationship between practitioners and parents under the new conditions, including practitioners' ability to resort to flexible, digital or hybrid communication methods with families proved important. Moreover, everyday practical help from Youth Welfare Agencies and family service providers could often change the parental perception of these professionals for the better, thereby strengthening the relationship between practitioners and parents. LIMITATIONS: A key limitation of the study comprises the fact that the study findings are limited to the earlier phase of the pandemic.
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.