Asking youth and adults about child maltreatment: a review of government surveys

Abstract

ObjectivesIn this review we: (1) identify and describe nationally representative surveys with child maltreatment (CM) questions conducted by governments in low-income, middle-income and high-income countries and (2) describe procedures implemented to address respondents’ safety and minimise potential distress.DesignWe conducted a systematic search across eight databases from 1 January 2000 to 5 July 2021 to identify original studies with information about relevant surveys. Additional information about surveys was obtained through survey methods studies, survey reports, survey websites or by identifying full questionnaires (when available).ResultsForty-six studies representing 139 surveys (98 youth and 41 adult) conducted by governments from 105 countries were identified. Surveys implemented a variety of procedures to maximise the safety and/or reduce distress for respondents including providing the option to withdraw from the survey and/or securing confidentiality and privacy for the respondent. In many surveys, further steps were taken such as providing information for support services, providing sensitivity training to survey administrators when interviews were conducted, among others. A minority of surveys took additional steps to empirically assess potential distress experienced by respondents.ConclusionsAssessing risk and protective factors and developing effective interventions and policies are essential to reduce the burden of violence against children. While asking about experiences of CM requires careful consideration, procedures to maximise the safety and minimise potential distress to respondents have been successfully implemented globally, although practices differ across surveys. Further analysis is required to assist governments to implement the best possible safety protocols to protect respondents in future surveys.

Child-Reported Family Violence: A Systematic Review of Available Instruments

“…Exclusion criteria included (a) data that were not self-reported by a child or adolescent, (b) studies that reported data on child’s emotional or behavioral problems but not FV, (c) studies that focused on violence, bullying or abuse external to the family (e.g., school bullying or community violence), (d) articles in which the FV instrument was part of a population-level government survey or census that was not suitable for FV screening or assessment specifically (for a review of these types of surveys, see Campeau et al, 2022 ), (e) unpublished literature (e.g., dissertations) and (f) articles in a language other than English.…”