Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37451739›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2023

Cohort analysis of child abuse and neglect cases treated during the initial 2 years of a programme to support hospital-based child protection work in Austria.

Eva Anna Mora-Theuer, Sophie Klomfar, Dariga Ramazanova, Chryssa Grylli, Maria Kletecka-Pulker, Sabine Völkl-Kernstock, Gabriel Otterman, Judit Simon, Susanne Greber-Platzer

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2023. 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. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
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

9 authors.

Eva Anna Mora-TheuerDepartment of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.ORCID 0000-0002-2620-6010
Sophie KlomfarDepartment of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Dariga RamazanovaCenter for Medical Data Science, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Chryssa GrylliDepartment of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Maria Kletecka-PulkerLudwig Boltzmann Institute for Digital Health and Patient Safety, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Sabine Völkl-KernstockDepartment of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Gabriel OttermanDepartment of Biomedical and Clinical Sciences, Linköping University, Linkoping, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0003-4837-9614
Judit SimonDepartment of Health Economics, Center for Public Health, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Susanne Greber-PlatzerDepartment of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria susanne.greber-platzer@meduniwien.ac.at.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo describe characteristics of suspected child abuse and neglect (CAN) cases associated with the decision of paediatric departments (PDs) in Vienna, Austria, to involve services of a regional tertiary child protection service programme (Forensische Kinder- und JugendUntersuchungsStelle, FOKUS).

designRetrospective cohort analysis of a regional data collection of CAN cases over the first 2 years of FOKUS's operational period (1 July 2015-30 June 2017).

settingAll CAN cases reported to the PDs of six public hospitals in Vienna. Five of these public hospitals were secondary heath care centres and one was a tertiary healthcare centre.

resultsOverall, 231 cases (59.1%) were treated without and 160 (40.9%) with additional involvement of the FOKUS service programme. The odds of a case to be treated without FOKUS involvement were higher if neglect was suspected (OR 3.233, 95% CI 2.024 to 5.279). In contrast, when sexual abuse was suspected, the odds for involvement with FOKUS were significantly higher (OR 7.577, 95% CI 4.580 to 12.879). The odds of being managed with FOKUS services nearly doubled when multiple forms of abuse were suspected (OR 1.926, 95% CI 1.136 to 3.285). The odds for additional FOKUS involvement were significantly lower for patients treated as inpatients (OR 0.239, 95% CI 0.151 to 0.373). CAN patients managed with FOKUS involvement were significantly more often reported to law enforcement (LE) (OR 3.234, 95% CI 2.078 to 5.002). Concurrently, suspected sexual abuse cases and cases reported to LE were more frequently treated in the PD of the tertiary centre than in other PDs (χ

conclusionCAN case characteristics significantly influenced if PDs involved a tertiary child protection programme. Suspected sexual abuse, if more than one form of CAN was suspected and cases reported to LE required additional specialist expertise. For suspected neglect involvement of tertiary services seemed less important.

Indexed as

Child AbuseChild Abuse, SexualAustriaChildCohort StudiesHospitals, PublicHumansRetrospective Studieschild protectioncommunity child healthnon-accidental injurypaediatric A&E and ambulatory care

Identifiers

PMID37451739
PMCPMC10351272

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.