ArticleChildren (Basel, Switzerland)2026
Understanding Vulnerability During Preventive Child Health Examinations: Insights from Danish General Practitioners.
Article in Children (Basel, Switzerland), 2026. 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
objectivesChild vulnerability is a predictor for potentially adverse challenges for the child and family, but the term is used inconsistently across settings. Danish general practitioners (GPs) are centrally positioned as the front line of the health care system. Thus, the aim of this study is to explore Danish GPs' perspectives and assessment of child vulnerability, using an exploratory, sequential mixed-methods approach.
methodsEleven GPs were interviewed, focusing on perceptions and management of child vulnerability in the context of preventive child health examinations (PCHEs). Interviews were analyzed in two stages. From the first deductive analysis, a quantitative data recording chart was developed. This was distributed to 10 general practices, to collect GPs' perceptions and management of child vulnerability, and 197 recordings were completed. Secondly, to develop themes independently of the deductive coding, data was analyzed inductively, creating an in-depth understanding of GPs' perspectives. This resulted in four themes.
resultsGPs associated the concept of child vulnerability with a multitude of social, somatic, and psychological factors. To recognize child vulnerability, GPs found time and scope during PCHEs limited and knowledge of the family essential. Collaboration with social services was perceived as insufficient. The most frequent finding during PCHEs was related to somatic challenges (60%) and follow-up consultation was the most frequent response (64%).
conclusionsGPs considered child vulnerability a complex term. Assessment of child vulnerability was strongly related to knowledge of the family, and usually based on several consultations, which underscores that PCHEs represent only one of several contexts where concerns are assessed and addressed.
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.