ArticleJournal of the Canadian Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry = Journal de l'Academie canadienne de psychiatrie de l'enfant et de l'adolescent2025
More Arguments for the Weakness of the Empirical Evidence Used to Support Spanking Bans: Rejoinder to Afifi
Article in Journal of the Canadian Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry = Journal de l'Academie canadienne de psychiatrie de l'enfant et de l'adolescent, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Continuation of a Consideration of Spanking and Spanking Bans.Journal of the Canadian Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry = Journal de l'Academie canadienne de psychiatrie de l'enfant et de l'adolescent · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Comment on
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In this rejoinder we address 13 concerns elicited by our invited commentary "An update on the scientific evidence for and against the legal banning of disciplinary spanking." In addition to defending assertions made in the initial commentary, we make several new substantive arguments. In response to dissenters' equating of non-experimental evidence against spanking with non-experimental evidence against smoking, we demonstrate that the two are very dissimilar. We question the purpose of spanking bans, providing stronger evidence that they do not seem to prevent child abuse. We review Canada's association with the UN's Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) before and after the 2006 classification of all physical punishment as violence. We discuss the disciplining of children with disabilities. We encourage fellow researchers to avoid the scholar-advocacy bias, appropriately discriminating methodological evaluations of empirical evidence from personal convictions.
Identifiers
40969678PMC12442254What 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.