Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35446727›Full record

SynthesisTrauma, violence & abuse2023

Measuring Violence Against Children: A COSMIN Systematic Review of the Psychometric Properties of Child and Adolescent Self-Report Measures.

Franziska Meinck, Lakshmi Neelakantan, Bridget Steele, Janina Jochim, Lynn M Davies, Mark Boyes, Jane Barlow, Michael Dunne

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Trauma, violence & abuse, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Critical windows: timing of child maltreatment exposure and adult mental health.Child and adolescent psychiatry and mental health · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Observational
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. 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

8 authors.

Franziska MeinckSchool of Social and Political Science, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-5234-3799
Lakshmi NeelakantanMoray House School of Education, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-3913-3447
Bridget SteeleDepartment of Social Policy and Intervention, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-2028-558X
Janina JochimDepartment of Social Policy and Intervention, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-6449-9838
Lynn M DaviesSchool of Social and Political Science, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
Mark BoyesCurtin enAble Institute and School of Population Health, Faculty of Health Sciences, Curtin University, Perth, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-5420-8606
Jane BarlowDepartment of Social Policy and Intervention, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Michael DunneAustralian Centre for Health Law Research, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Research on violence against children (VAC) requires meaningful, valid, and reliable self-report by children. Many instruments have been used globally and decisions to select suitable measures are complex. This review identifies child and adolescent self-report measures that are most likely to yield valid, reliable, and comparable data in this field. A systematic review (PROSPERO: CRD4201706) was conducted using the 2018 Consensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instrument (COSMIN) criteria. Six electronic databases and gray literature were searched. Manuscripts published in English and describing the development and psychometric qualities of child/adolescent self-report instruments were included. Thirty-nine original instruments and 13 adaptations were identified in 124 studies. The quality of evidence ranged from "very low" to "high" depending on the measure and the psychometric properties assessed. Most measures were not widely used, and some have been applied in many settings despite limited evidence of their psychometric rigor. Few studies assessed content validity, particularly with children. The ACE, CTQ, CTS-PC, CECA, ICAST, and JVQ have the best psychometric properties. An overview of items measuring frequency, onset, duration, perpetrators, and locations is provided as well as an assessment of the practicalities for administration to help researchers select the instrument best suited for their research questions. This comprehensive review shows the strengths and weaknesses of VAC research instruments. Six measures that have sufficient psychometric properties are recommended for use in research, with the caveat that extensive piloting is carried out to ensure sufficient content validity for the local context and population.

Indexed as

ViolenceAdolescentChildDatabases, FactualHumansPsychometricsReproducibility of ResultsSelf Reportchild abusechild maltreatmentinstrumentmeasurementpsychometricsviolence against children

Identifiers

PMID35446727
PMCPMC10240621

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.