Predicting Child Abuse and Neglect in New Zealand

Abstract

We describe the three stages of our attempt to predict parenting problems and child abuse antenatally. In the first stage, we made an intuitive check list of ten items from 173 risk factors drawn from the literature. The check list was useful in predicting who would relinquish care or have major parenting difficulty in two different samples drawn four years apart and before and after some major sociocultural changes in New Zealand. In the second stage we used statistical techniques rather than intuition to maximise the predictive ability of the checklist and produced a new one of 9 items. In the third stage we validated the new list in a random sample of pregnant mothers. It was effective in predicting parenting difficulty in the 2 years after childbirth. We recommend it for routine use in a New Zealand setting. We do not know how useful the checklist will be in other cultural settings.

Risk assessment of parents’ concerns at 18 months in preventive child health care predicted child abuse and neglect

“…Nygren, Nelson, and Klein (2004) reviewed a number of these screening tests and procedures and found only one of the instruments to achieve good to fair results in a number of studies: the Kempe Family Stress Inventory (Korfmacher, 2000); relative risk 8.41 at 1 year of age and 5.19 at 2 years). In an earlier review (Peters & Barlow, 2003) the perinatally applied Dunedin Family Services Indicator too was found to be psychometrically valid in predicting child abuse and neglect over a 2-year period (sensitivity 100%, specificity 87.3% (Muir et al, 1989)). …”

Systematic review of instruments designed to predict child maltreatment during the antenatal and postnatal periods

“…Four are checklists completed by professionals by collecting information directly from the subject (Browne and Saqi, 1988;Gordon, 1977;Lealman et al, 1983;Muir et al, 1989). In one case, information is obtained through both a semi-structured interview and a brief questionnaire (Muir et al, 1989).…”

“…Six instruments require the professional to make subjective judgements (e.g. whether parent is indifferent, intolerant or overanxious towards child) (Brayden et al, 1993;Browne and Saqi, 1988;Gordon, 1977;Hunter et al, 1978;Muir et al, 1989;Murphy et al, 1985). Seven of the instruments comprise summative scales and have cutoff points above which respondents are categorized as being 'high risk' (Brayden et al, 1993;Gordon, 1977;Hunter et al, 1978;Lealman et al, 1983;Milner et al, 1984;Muir et al, 1989;Murphy et al, 1985 (Browne and Saqi, 1988).…”

Psychosociale risicosignalering in de zwangerschap, een overzicht van Nederlandse instrumenten

“…De DFSI, ALPHA en Voorzorg zijn wel (op onderdelen) gevalideerd via RCT's in de landen van herkomst. 23,16,17,29 Voor de R4U is een trial aangemeld bij het Nederlandse Trial Register. De EPDS is in Nederland wel gevalideerd ten aanzien van sensitiviteit en specificiteit voor postnataal gebruik 26 maar niet voor prenataal gebruik.…”