Department of Special Needs Education, Faculty of Educational Sciences, University of Oslo, Norway.
School of Occupational Therapy, Social Work and Speech Pathology, Faculty of Health Sciences, Curtin University, Perth, Australia.
Trauma Violence Abuse. 2021 Dec;22(5):1296-1315. doi: 10.1177/1524838020915591. Epub 2020 Apr 9.
Child maltreatment (CM) is global public health issue with devastating lifelong consequences. Global organizations have endeavored to eliminate CM; however, there is lack of consensus on what instruments are most suitable for the investigation and prevention of CM. This systematic review aimed to appraise the psychometric properties (other than content validity) of all current parent- or caregiver-reported CM instruments and recommend the most suitable for use.
A systematic search of the CINAHL, Embase, ERIC, PsycINFO, PubMed, and Sociological Abstracts databases was performed. The evaluation of psychometric properties was conducted according to the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) guidelines for systematic reviews of patient-report outcome measures. Responsiveness was beyond the scope of this systematic review, and content validity has been reported on in a companion paper (Part 1). Only instruments developed and published in English were included.
Twenty-five studies reported on selected psychometric properties of 15 identified instruments. The methodological quality of the studies was overall adequate. The psychometric properties of the instruments were generally indeterminate or not reported due to incomplete or missing psychometric data; high-quality evidence on the psychometric properties was limited.
No instruments could be recommended as most suitable for use in clinic and research. Nine instruments were identified as promising based on current psychometric data but would need further psychometric evidence for them to be recommended.
儿童虐待(CM)是一个全球性的公共卫生问题,会对儿童造成终身的毁灭性影响。全球组织一直在努力消除 CM;然而,对于哪些工具最适合调查和预防 CM,还缺乏共识。本系统评价旨在评估所有当前基于父母或照顾者报告的 CM 工具的心理测量特性(内容效度除外),并推荐最适合使用的工具。
对 CINAHL、Embase、ERIC、PsycINFO、PubMed 和 Sociological Abstracts 数据库进行了系统检索。心理测量特性的评估是根据健康测量工具选择的共识标准(COSMIN)指南进行的,该指南用于患者报告结局测量的系统评价。反应性不在本系统评价的范围内,内容效度已在一篇配套论文(第 1 部分)中报告。仅包括以英文开发和发表的工具。
25 项研究报告了 15 种确定工具的特定心理测量特性。研究的方法学质量总体上是足够的。由于不完全或缺失心理测量数据,工具的心理测量特性通常不确定或未报告;关于心理测量特性的高质量证据有限。
没有一种工具可以被推荐为最适合在临床和研究中使用。根据当前的心理测量数据,确定了 9 种有前途的工具,但需要进一步的心理测量证据才能推荐使用。