ArticleBMC oral health2024
Association of child abuse and neglect training with filing reports of concern to child welfare services: a cross-sectional study.
Article in BMC oral health, 2024. 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.
- Factors that inhibit reporting of child maltreatment among dental health personnel - a scoping review.BMC oral health · 2025Article
- Implementation of statutory oral health examinations among Finnish preschool children: a register-based pilot study.Acta odontologica Scandinavica · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe aptitude, knowledge, and competence of dental health personnel on child abuse and neglect (CAN) is not optimal for deciding when to file a report of concern to child welfare services (CWS).
objectivesThe aim of this study was, firstly, to assess the association of the public dental health personnel 's (PDHP) training on CAN received in the last three work years, i.e., in 2016 through 2018 with filing reports to the CWS in the same period and secondly to assess the association of expressed need of training on CAN with filing reports to the CWS.
methodsThis cross-sectional study uses data from an electronic survey census of PDHP from Norway (n = 1791) conducted in 2019. The Pearson chi-square test, non-parametric tests, logistic, and negative binomial regression were used for unadjusted and adjusted analysis. Data was reported with proportions, odds ratios (OR), incidence rate ratios and 95% confidence intervals (CIs).
resultsFrom 2016 to 2018, the prevalence estimate of filing reports to CWS was 50%, with a mean (standard deviation) of 1.39 (2.11) reports sent. The logistic regression analysis showed an association between filing reports of concern and CAN training in the last three years. Compared to those that had not received CAN training during the three previous years, the ORs (95% CI) for filing reports to the CWS during the same period was 2.5 (1.6-4.0) for one day CAN work training, 3.2 (2.0-5.1) for 2-4 days CAN training and 4.9 (2.6-9.4) for five or more days CAN training. Compared to workers who did not need training in reporting (routines of CAN), those who expressed the need for a little more and more training were less likely to file a report. The corresponding OR were 0.6 (0.4-0.9) and 0.6 (0.3-0.9), respectively.
conclusionCAN training during the last three years is associated with filing reports of concern to CWS in the same period among PDHP in Norway. The likelihood of filing CAN reports increased with the number of days of CAN training received. Secondly, the PDHP with an expressed need for training on CAN routines were less likely to report suspicions to CWS.
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.