Cargando…

Methodological challenges in following up patients of a hospital child protection team: is there a recruitment bias?

BACKGROUND: The aims of this study are to describe the methodological challenges in recruiting a follow-up sample of children referred to an interdisciplinary hospital child protection team (CPT) and to compare participating versus non-participating groups on several demographic variables and maltre...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Jud, Andreas, Lips, Ulrich, Landolt, Markus A
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2010
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2989303/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21050452
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1753-2000-4-27
_version_ 1782192341781577728
author Jud, Andreas
Lips, Ulrich
Landolt, Markus A
author_facet Jud, Andreas
Lips, Ulrich
Landolt, Markus A
author_sort Jud, Andreas
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The aims of this study are to describe the methodological challenges in recruiting a follow-up sample of children referred to an interdisciplinary hospital child protection team (CPT) and to compare participating versus non-participating groups on several demographic variables and maltreatment characteristics. METHODS: Of the 319 in- and outpatients referred to the CPT at University Children's Hospital Zurich from 2005–2006 a sample of 180 children was drawn to contact for a follow-up. The children and their parents were asked to participate in a face-to-face interview at the hospital; in 42 cases the children and parents consented to do so. Alternatively, the parents could take part in a telephone interview (n = 39). Non-participation resulted because no contact or adequate communication in German, French, or English could be established (n = 49) or because the parents or children refused to participate (n = 50). RESULTS: Participants and non-participants did not differ significantly in mean child age at follow-up, gender, family status, place of residence, certainty and type of maltreatment, and type of perpetrator. However, the child's nationality had a significant impact: Percentages of foreign nationals were higher in the fully participating group (45%; n = 19) and the non-contactable group (53%; n = 26) and significantly lower in the refusal (26%; n = 10) and the telephone interview group (18%; n = 9). Although a high percentage of families had moved in the few years since the CPT intervention (32%; n = 57), the percentage of moves was not significantly higher in non-participants compared to participants. CONCLUSIONS: Further research is needed to support these results in different national backgrounds and to test for biases in variables not included – especially socioeconomic status. This includes gathering more detailed information on non-participants, while respecting ethical boundaries. Overall, the fact that only child's nationality was unevenly distributed between participants and non-participants is encouraging.
format Text
id pubmed-2989303
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2010
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-29893032010-11-21 Methodological challenges in following up patients of a hospital child protection team: is there a recruitment bias? Jud, Andreas Lips, Ulrich Landolt, Markus A Child Adolesc Psychiatry Ment Health Research BACKGROUND: The aims of this study are to describe the methodological challenges in recruiting a follow-up sample of children referred to an interdisciplinary hospital child protection team (CPT) and to compare participating versus non-participating groups on several demographic variables and maltreatment characteristics. METHODS: Of the 319 in- and outpatients referred to the CPT at University Children's Hospital Zurich from 2005–2006 a sample of 180 children was drawn to contact for a follow-up. The children and their parents were asked to participate in a face-to-face interview at the hospital; in 42 cases the children and parents consented to do so. Alternatively, the parents could take part in a telephone interview (n = 39). Non-participation resulted because no contact or adequate communication in German, French, or English could be established (n = 49) or because the parents or children refused to participate (n = 50). RESULTS: Participants and non-participants did not differ significantly in mean child age at follow-up, gender, family status, place of residence, certainty and type of maltreatment, and type of perpetrator. However, the child's nationality had a significant impact: Percentages of foreign nationals were higher in the fully participating group (45%; n = 19) and the non-contactable group (53%; n = 26) and significantly lower in the refusal (26%; n = 10) and the telephone interview group (18%; n = 9). Although a high percentage of families had moved in the few years since the CPT intervention (32%; n = 57), the percentage of moves was not significantly higher in non-participants compared to participants. CONCLUSIONS: Further research is needed to support these results in different national backgrounds and to test for biases in variables not included – especially socioeconomic status. This includes gathering more detailed information on non-participants, while respecting ethical boundaries. Overall, the fact that only child's nationality was unevenly distributed between participants and non-participants is encouraging. BioMed Central 2010-11-04 /pmc/articles/PMC2989303/ /pubmed/21050452 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1753-2000-4-27 Text en Copyright ©2010 Jud et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research
Jud, Andreas
Lips, Ulrich
Landolt, Markus A
Methodological challenges in following up patients of a hospital child protection team: is there a recruitment bias?
title Methodological challenges in following up patients of a hospital child protection team: is there a recruitment bias?
title_full Methodological challenges in following up patients of a hospital child protection team: is there a recruitment bias?
title_fullStr Methodological challenges in following up patients of a hospital child protection team: is there a recruitment bias?
title_full_unstemmed Methodological challenges in following up patients of a hospital child protection team: is there a recruitment bias?
title_short Methodological challenges in following up patients of a hospital child protection team: is there a recruitment bias?
title_sort methodological challenges in following up patients of a hospital child protection team: is there a recruitment bias?
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2989303/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21050452
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1753-2000-4-27
work_keys_str_mv AT judandreas methodologicalchallengesinfollowinguppatientsofahospitalchildprotectionteamistherearecruitmentbias
AT lipsulrich methodologicalchallengesinfollowinguppatientsofahospitalchildprotectionteamistherearecruitmentbias
AT landoltmarkusa methodologicalchallengesinfollowinguppatientsofahospitalchildprotectionteamistherearecruitmentbias