Observational studyBMJ paediatrics open2026
Enhancing implementation and compliance of the Screening Instrument for Child Abuse and Neglect (SCAN) in emergency departments in the Netherlands.
Observational study in BMJ paediatrics open, 2026. 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.
- Poverty screening among paediatricians in the Netherlands: an exploratory study of current practices.European journal of pediatrics · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
study purposeThis study examines the implementation of the Screening Instrument for Child Abuse and Neglect (SCAN) and the Structured Tool for Evaluating Positive Screened cases (STEPS) in nine emergency departments (EDs). The study aimed to assess whether implementation could enhance compliance with SCAN and to evaluate the usability of SCAN&STEPS within an implementation-focused design, in response to the decline in child maltreatment recognition observed in Dutch EDs over the past decade.
methodsSCAN&STEPS was embedded in ED workflow and electronic health records (EHRs), supported by a selection of implementation strategies, including e-learning, policy manuals and an awareness campaign. Effectiveness was assessed through compliance with SCAN, comparing preimplementation and postimplementation screening rates, with a ≥10% increase defined as clinically relevant. Usability of SCAN&STEPS was examined using a mixed-method design combining the Measurement Instrument for Determinants of Innovations and semistructured interviews. Subgroup analyses were conducted by hospital type, EHR, profession and years of working experience.
resultsAfter implementation, the average compliance rate increased from 57.5% to 70.5%, with 3 of 8 sites achieving ≥10% improvement. Rates varied by site, with university hospital EDs having the highest improvement. Compliance was influenced by EHR configurations. Usability analysis identified five facilitators (perception of responsibility, social support, self-efficacy, knowledge and formal management ratification) and one barrier (unsettled organisation). Users considered SCAN&STEPS user-friendly, though perceived support differed between nurses and physicians due to role-specific factors. RELEVANCE: SCAN&STEPS can improve compliance in recognising child maltreatment concerns, but tailored strategies are needed for further implementation in Dutch hospitals. The standardised approach enhances uniform data collection, enabling comparative analysis and interdisciplinary collaboration, advancing early detection of child maltreatment. Broader international adoption should account for policy and system-level differences and requires further validation to ensure applicability beyond the Dutch context.
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.