ReviewHeliyon2023
A systematic review of the measurement properties of self-report screening tools to detect risk or exposure to child sexual abuse for children under 12.
Review in Heliyon, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Child sexual abuse (CSA) is a substantial public health issue that is challenging to measure epidemiologically due to the "pact of silence" among those involved. Validated tools could contribute to early recognition or risk detection for CSA. We aimed to systematically assess self-report tools' measurement properties and methodological quality that detect risk or exposure to CSA for children under twelve. The search strategy, selection criteria, data extraction, data analysis, and synthesis followed the COSMIN methodology for systematic reviews (2018). PROSPERO 2021 registration CRD42021278465. MEDLINE, COCHRANE, EMBASE, CINAHL, SCOPUS, and ERIC were searched until August 2021, with an updated search on September 23, 2021, and unlimited by language. The inclusion criteria were: to assess risk or exposure to CSA under twelve years old by objective items and self-report tools; sexual violence risk or exposure in the domestic context; the application context should include health facilities (such as hospital emergency rooms, outpatient clinics, pediatric wards, psychology centers, social services), education (such as schools) and community; no language or date restriction. The exclusion criteria were: non-self-report tools studies, comprehensive articles, comments, editorials, expert opinions, and studies of projective techniques. The COSMIN risk of bias checklist was used to evaluate the methodological quality of the included studies. Feasibility aspects were assessed. This study had no funding source; 29 studies describing eight tools met eligibility criteria. No single instrument reported all nine measurement properties outlined by the COSMIN methodology. The strength of the evidence was moderate to high for six out of eight instruments. ICAST-C and JVQ were the tools that obtained the highest number of rated measurement properties and strength of evidence.
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.