Fuller Tamara, Nieto Martin
Children and Family Research Center, School of Social Work, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, IL, USA.
Child Maltreat. 2009 Feb;14(1):27-37. doi: 10.1177/1077559508326925.
Although it is a widely used indicator, the use of substantiation in child welfare practice and research is not without critics. Much of this criticism concerns the ability of the substantiation disposition to distinguish between child protective services (CPS) investigations in which maltreatment occurs or does not occur. This study examined the relationship between substantiation and maltreatment rereporting using an analytic technique known as propensity score matching (PSM). Children with initially substantiated maltreatment reports were at significantly higher risk for rereporting than those with initially unsubstantiated reports, even after matching the two groups on propensity scores based on several demographic and case characteristics. Although additional study using PSM on other samples is warranted, this evidence supports the predictive validity of the substantiation disposition and its continued use as one factor to consider when allocating limited post-investigation services.
尽管它是一个广泛使用的指标,但在儿童福利实践和研究中使用证据确认并非没有批评者。这种批评大多涉及证据确认处置方式区分儿童保护服务(CPS)调查中虐待行为是否发生的能力。本研究使用一种称为倾向得分匹配(PSM)的分析技术,检验了证据确认与虐待行为再次报告之间的关系。即使根据若干人口统计学和案件特征对两组进行倾向得分匹配后,最初报告有证据证实虐待行为的儿童再次报告的风险仍显著高于最初报告无证据证实的儿童。尽管有必要对其他样本使用PSM进行更多研究,但这一证据支持了证据确认处置方式的预测效度,以及在分配有限的调查后服务时将其作为一个需考虑因素继续使用。