Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36687889›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in psychology2022

The journey to reporting child protection violations in sport: Stakeholder perspectives.

Yetsa A Tuakli-Wosornu, Sandi L Kirby, Anne Tivas, Daniel Rhind

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in psychology, 2022. 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. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  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

4 authors.

Yetsa A Tuakli-WosornuDepartment of Social and Behavioral Sciences, Yale School of Public Health, New Haven, CT, United States.
Sandi L KirbyDepartment of Sociology, University of Winnipeg, Winnipeg, MB, Canada.
Anne TivasSafe Sport International, London, United Kingdom.
Daniel RhindSchool of Sport, Exercise, and Health Sciences, Loughborough University, Loughborough, United Kingdom.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Sport is a context within which human and children's rights should be respected, promoted, and protected. Yet, research and high-profile cases demonstrate that this is not always the case. To understand the existence (or not) of reporting mechanisms for child protection violations in sport, as well as how existing reporting and response systems operate, the authors, with the support of the Centre for Sport and Human Rights, conducted research on current abuse disclosure and reporting pathways in sport. The purpose was two-fold: to describe global child protection systems and reporting mechanisms, and to identify major areas of stakeholder concern, in terms of effective case resolution, healing, and children's experiences along reporting pathways in sport. Two sources of evidence were tapped. First, a rapid evidence assessment consisting of a literature review and an exploratory survey with 112 global stakeholders was conducted. Second, focus group interviews informed by the evidence assessment were held with nine athletes with lived experiences of abuse in youth sport and 13 global human and children's rights experts primarily working outside of sport. Through this emergent research, a 'pathway' or 'journey' to incident reporting in sport was developed, summarized as 5 'Rs':

Indexed as

athletesemotional abusegrievance reportinghuman rightsneglectphysical abusesafe sportsexual abuse

Identifiers

PMID36687889
PMCPMC9846813

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.