ArticlePloS one2025
Child welfare worker perspectives on documentation and case recording practices in Canada: A mixed-methods study protocol.
Article in PloS one, 2025. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In health care and child welfare, clinical records and case notes serve multiple functions. When records are aggregated and processed to create administrative data, they can be analyzed and used to inform policy development and decision-making. To be useful, such data should be complete, accurate, and recorded in a standardized way. However, sources of bias and error can impact the quality of administrative data. During the development of national child welfare data in Canada, child welfare sector partners expressed concerns about the accuracy and completeness of data about children and families. This protocol describes a study that seeks to answer two questions: 1) What individual and institutional factors influence how client data is recorded by child welfare workers in Canada? 2) What data quality issues are created through documentation and case recording practices that may impact the use of clinical case management system data for public health statistics? In this protocol, we describe an exploratory mixed methods study that involves an online survey, interviews with a purposive sample of child welfare workers, and a document review of case recording guidelines. To be eligible for the study, participants must have worked at a child welfare agency or department with clinical documentation responsibilities as a part of their job. We will use descriptive statistics to analyze the survey data and thematic analysis to analyze the qualitative data. This study will help uncover strengths, limitations, and possible sources of bias created through case recording and documentation practices in child welfare. Study results will be shared through presentations to interest holders and will inform the further development of national child welfare data in Canada.
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.