IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0123366.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Systematic Review of Childhood Maltreatment Assessments in Population-Representative Surveys Since 1990

Author

Listed:
  • Wendy Hovdestad
  • Aimée Campeau
  • Dawn Potter
  • Lil Tonmyr

Abstract

Background: Population-representative surveys that assess childhood maltreatment and health are a valuable resource to explore the implications of child maltreatment for population health. Systematic identification and evaluation of such surveys is needed to facilitate optimal use of their data and to inform future research. Objectives: To inform researchers of the existence and nature of population-representative surveys relevant to understanding links between childhood maltreatment and health; to evaluate the assessment of childhood maltreatment in this body of work. Methods: We included surveys that: 1) were representative of the non-institutionalized population of any size nation or of any geopolitical region ≥ 10 million people; 2) included a broad age range (≥ 40 years); 3) measured health; 4) assessed childhood maltreatment retrospectively; and 5) were conducted since 1990. We used Internet and database searching (including CINAHL, Embase, ERIC, Global Health, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Scopus, Social Policy and Practice: January 1990 to March 2014), expert consultation, and other means to identify surveys and associated documentation. Translations of non-English survey content were verified by fluent readers of survey languages. We developed checklists to abstract and evaluate childhood maltreatment content. Results: Fifty-four surveys from 39 countries met inclusion criteria. Sample sizes ranged from 1,287-51,945 and response rates from 15%-96%. Thirteen surveys assessed neglect, 15 emotional abuse; 18 exposure to family violence; 26 physical abuse; 48 sexual abuse. Fourteen surveys assessed more than three types; six of these were conducted since 2010. In nine surveys childhood maltreatment assessments were detailed (+10 items for at least one type of maltreatment). Seven surveys’ assessments had known reliability and/or validity. Conclusions and Implications: Data from 54 surveys can be used to explore the population health relevance of child maltreatment. Assessment of childhood maltreatment is not comprehensive but there is evidence of recent improvement.

Suggested Citation

  • Wendy Hovdestad & Aimée Campeau & Dawn Potter & Lil Tonmyr, 2015. "A Systematic Review of Childhood Maltreatment Assessments in Population-Representative Surveys Since 1990," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(5), pages 1-26, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0123366
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0123366
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0123366
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0123366&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0123366?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0123366. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.