ArticleEuropean journal of pediatrics2026
Trends in documenting and coding of child physical abuse in hospitalised children and adolescents in Germany: a nationwide administrative data analysis.
Article in European journal of pediatrics, 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Hospital administrative data are widely used to monitor child physical abuse (CPA), but coding is often inconsistent. We described the national frequency and distribution of CPA-related coding in German administrative data and assessed how ICD-10-GM indicators and procedural coding influence ascertainment and temporal trends. We analysed aggregated German hospital data from the InEK data browser (2019-2024, ages 0-17 years), comparing T74.1 with broader indicator sets (a validated algorithm adapted to ICD-10-GM and an extended German set) and capturing procedural safeguarding documentation (OPS 1-945.x). We summarised principal diagnoses among hospitalisations with CPA-related coding and quantified CPA-related coding among admissions with predefined abuse-relevant injuries (fractures, haematomas) in children aged 0-2 years, a group at increased risk of physical abuse. CPA-related diagnostic coding remained rare (< 0.5% of annual admissions excluding procedural codes) but increased from 2019 to 2024, driven mainly by assessment- and psychosocial-context indicators (particularly Z04.5 and Z65), whereas T74.1 was stable or declining. Several low-frequency codes showed pronounced year-to-year variability. OPS 1-945.x-a child-protection assessment of suspected endangerment rather than confirmed abuse-had the highest counts and increased, with a decline in 2022. CPA-related indicators were mainly associated with head injuries, most often traumatic subdural haemorrhage and concussion. Among children with abuse-relevant fractures and haematomas, explicit T74.1 coding occurred in only a small minority, whereas OPS 1-945.x was more frequent.
conclusionThese findings highlight the need for standardised coding guidance, validation of broader code sets, and training on administrative documentation to improve the surveillance value of hospital data. WHAT IS KNOWN: • CPA is under-coded in hospital administrative data; T74.1 is rarely used. • Broader ICD/procedure-based definitions can increase case capture. WHAT IS NEW: • German national discharge data (2019-2024) show stable/declining T74.1 with rising Z04.5/Z65 and increasing procedural codes OPS 1-945.x. • Including the broader indicator and procedural codes (e.g., Z04.5, Z65, OPS 1-945.x) reveals a marked shift in how concerns about CPA are documented, with these codes increasingly used alongside or instead of T74.1, particularly among children admitted with abuse-relevant injuries.
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.