IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/cysrev/v61y2016icp288-295.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Predicting relapse of problematic child-rearing situations

Author

Listed:
  • van der Put, Claudia E.
  • Assink, Mark
  • Stams, Geert Jan J.M.

Abstract

The development and evaluation of risk assessment instruments for child maltreatment is still in its infancy, both in the Netherlands and internationally. The aim of this study was to examine the predictive validity of a structured clinical judgement instrument – the Check List of Child Safety (CLCS) – that is widely used in the Netherlands. The second aim was to examine the predictive validity of a newly developed actuarial risk classification that is based on variables measured with the CLCS.

Suggested Citation

  • van der Put, Claudia E. & Assink, Mark & Stams, Geert Jan J.M., 2016. "Predicting relapse of problematic child-rearing situations," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 288-295.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:cysrev:v:61:y:2016:i:c:p:288-295
    DOI: 10.1016/j.childyouth.2016.01.002
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0190740916300020
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.childyouth.2016.01.002?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Shlonsky, Aron & Wagner, Dennis, 2005. "The next step: Integrating actuarial risk assessment and clinical judgment into an evidence-based practice framework in CPS case management," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 27(4), pages 409-427, April.
    2. Gambrill, Eileen & Shlonsky, Aron, 2000. "Risk assessment in context," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 22(11-12), pages 813-837.
    3. DePanfilis, Diane & Zuravin, Susan J., 2001. "Assessing risk to determine the need for services," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 23(1), pages 3-20, January.
    4. repec:cup:judgdm:v:3:y:2008:i::p:5-17 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. DePanfilis, Diane & Girvin, Heather, 2005. "Investigating child maltreatment in out-of-home care: Barriers to effective decision-making," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 27(4), pages 353-374, April.
    6. Cash, Scottye J., 2001. "Risk assessment in child welfare: the art and science," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 23(11), pages 811-830, November.
    7. Arad-Davidzon, Bilhah & Benbenishty, Rami, 2008. "The role of workers' attitudes and parent and child wishes in child protection workers' assessments and recommendation regarding removal and reunification," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 30(1), pages 107-121, January.
    8. Camasso, Michael J. & Jagannathan, Radha, 2000. "Modeling the reliability and predictive validity of risk assessment in child protective services," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 22(11-12), pages 873-896.
    9. Baird, Christopher & Wagner, Dennis, 2000. "The relative validity of actuarial- and consensus-based risk assessment systems," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 22(11-12), pages 839-871.
    10. Schwalbe, Craig S., 2008. "Strengthening the integration of actuarial risk assessment with clinical judgment in an evidence based practice framework," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 30(12), pages 1458-1464, December.
    11. Coohey, Carol & Johnson, Kristen & Renner, Lynette M. & Easton, Scott D., 2013. "Actuarial risk assessment in child protective services: Construction methodology and performance criteria," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 35(1), pages 151-161.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Vial, Annemiek & Assink, Mark & Stams, Geert Jan J.M. & van der Put, Claudia, 2020. "Safety assessment in child welfare: A comparison of instruments," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 108(C).
    2. Reekers, Sari E. & Dijkstra, Sharon & Stams, Geert Jan J.M. & Asscher, Jessica J. & Creemers, Hanneke E., 2018. "Signs of effectiveness of signs of safety? – A pilot study," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 177-184.
    3. Vial, Annemiek & van der Put, Claudia & Stams, Geert Jan J.M. & Assink, Mark, 2019. "The content validity and usability of a child safety assessment instrument," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 107(C).
    4. Dijkstra, Sharon & Creemers, Hanneke E. & Asscher, Jessica J. & Deković, Maja & Stams, Geert Jan J.M., 2017. "Family group conferencing in Dutch child welfare: Which families are most likely to organize a family group conference?," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 255-263.
    5. Annemiek Vial & Mark Assink & Geert Jan Stams & Claudia Van der Put, 2021. "Child Safety Assessment: Do Instrument-Based Decisions Concur with Decisions of Expert Panels?," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-22, May.
    6. Duindam, Hanne M. & Vial, Annemiek & Bouwmeester-Landweer, Merian B.R. & van der Put, Claudia E., 2023. "Differences and similarities between mothers’ and fathers’ risk factors for child maltreatment," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 150(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Emily Keddell, 2014. "Current Debates on Variability in Child Welfare Decision-Making: A Selected Literature Review," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 3(4), pages 1-25, November.
    2. Schwartz, Ira M. & York, Peter & Nowakowski-Sims, Eva & Ramos-Hernandez, Ana, 2017. "Predictive and prescriptive analytics, machine learning and child welfare risk assessment: The Broward County experience," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 309-320.
    3. Bolton, Annalese & Lennings, Chris, 2010. "Clinical opinions of structured risk assessments for forensic child protection: The development of a clinically relevant device," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 32(10), pages 1300-1310, October.
    4. Ryan, Scott & Wiles, Debra & Cash, Scottye & Siebert, Carl, 2005. "Risk assessments: empirically supported or values driven?," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 27(2), pages 213-225, February.
    5. Johanna Caldwell & Vandna Sinha, 2020. "(Re) Conceptualizing Neglect: Considering the Overrepresentation of Indigenous Children in Child Welfare Systems in Canada," Child Indicators Research, Springer;The International Society of Child Indicators (ISCI), vol. 13(2), pages 481-512, April.
    6. Shlonsky, Aron & Gambrill, Eileen, 2001. "The assessment and management of risk in child welfare services," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 23(1), pages 1-2, January.
    7. Herring, David J., 2009. "Fathers and child maltreatment: A research agenda based on evolutionary theory and behavioral biology research," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 31(8), pages 935-945, August.
    8. Schwalbe, Craig, 2004. "Re-visioning risk assessment for human service decision making," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 26(6), pages 561-576, June.
    9. Beth Coulthard & John Mallett & Brian Taylor, 2020. "Better Decisions for Children with “Big Data”: Can Algorithms Promote Fairness, Transparency and Parental Engagement?," Societies, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-16, December.
    10. Keddell, Emily, 2014. "Theorising the signs of safety approach to child protection social work: Positioning, codes and power," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 47(P1), pages 70-77.
    11. Coohey, Carol & Johnson, Kristen & Renner, Lynette M. & Easton, Scott D., 2013. "Actuarial risk assessment in child protective services: Construction methodology and performance criteria," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 35(1), pages 151-161.
    12. de Kwaadsteniet, Leontien & Bartelink, Cora & Witteman, Cilia & ten Berge, Ingrid & van Yperen, Tom, 2013. "Improved decision making about suspected child maltreatment: Results of structuring the decision process," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 347-352.
    13. Storhaug, Anita Skårstad, 2023. "The decision-making ecology of child welfare emergency placements," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 155(C).
    14. Johnson, Will & Clancy, Thomas & Bastian, Pascal, 2015. "Child abuse/neglect risk assessment under field practice conditions: Tests of external and temporal validity and comparison with heart disease prediction," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 76-85.
    15. Emily Keddell, 2019. "Algorithmic Justice in Child Protection: Statistical Fairness, Social Justice and the Implications for Practice," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 8(10), pages 1-22, October.
    16. Shlonsky, Aron & Wagner, Dennis, 2005. "The next step: Integrating actuarial risk assessment and clinical judgment into an evidence-based practice framework in CPS case management," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 27(4), pages 409-427, April.
    17. Gambrill, Eileen D., 2005. "Decision making in child welfare: Errors and their context," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 27(4), pages 347-352, April.
    18. Lee, Shawna J. & Sobeck, Joanne L. & Djelaj, Valentina & Agius, Elizabeth, 2013. "When practice and policy collide: Child welfare workers' perceptions of investigation processes," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 35(4), pages 634-641.
    19. Vanderfaeillie, Johan & Van Holen, Frank & Verheyden, Camille & Van Puyenbroeck, Bert & Benbenishty, Rami, 2023. "Decision-making on out-of-home care: The case of Flanders," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 155(C).
    20. Molina, A. & Palacios, J. & Jiménez-Morago, J.M., 2019. "Do more severe incidents lead to more drastic decisions? A study of professional child protection decision making in Spain," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 107(C).

    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:eee:cysrev:v:61:y:2016:i:c:p:288-295. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/childyouth .

    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.