Suppr超能文献

评估低收入和中等收入国家中照顾者与儿童的互动:工具和方法的系统综述

Evaluating caregiver-child interactions in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic review of tools and methods.

作者信息

Bozicevic L, Lucas C, Magai D N, Ooi Y, Maliwichi L, Sharp H, Gladstone M

机构信息

Department of Primary Care & Mental Health, Institute of Population Health, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.

Department of Women's and Children's Health, Institute of Life Course and Medical Sciences, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.

出版信息

J Reprod Infant Psychol. 2024 Mar 5:1-36. doi: 10.1080/02646838.2024.2321615.

Abstract

AIMS/BACKGROUND: The United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) has placed emphasis on improving early child development globally. This is supported through the Nurturing Care Framework which includes responsive caregiving. To evaluate responsive caregiving, tools to assess quality of caregiver-child interactions are used, however there is little information on how they are currently employed and/or adapted particularly in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) where children have a greater risk of adverse outcomes. The aim of this review is to provide a comprehensive guide on methodologies used to evaluate caregiver-child interaction - including their feasibility and cultural adaptation.

DESIGN/METHODS: We conducted a systematic review of studies over 20years in LMICs which assessed caregiver-child interactions. Characteristics of each tool, their validity (assessed with COSMIN Risk of Bias checklist), and the quality of the study (Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool) are reported.

RESULTS

We identified 59 studies using 34 tools across 20 different LMICs. Most tools (86.5%) employed video-recorded observations of caregiver-child interactions at home (e.g. Ainsworth's Sensitivity Scale, OMI) or in the laboratory (e.g. PICCOLO) with a few conducting direct observations in the field (e.g. OMCI, HOME); 13.5% were self-reported. Tools varied in methodology with limited or no mention of validity and reliability. Most tools are developed in Western countries and have not been culturally validated for use in LMIC settings.

CONCLUSION

There are limited caregiver-child interaction measures used in LMIC settings, with only some locally validated locally. Future studies should aim to ensure better validity, applicability and feasibility of caregiver-child interaction tools for global settings.

摘要

目的/背景:联合国可持续发展目标(SDGs)强调在全球范围内改善儿童早期发展。这通过包括回应性照护的关爱框架得到支持。为了评估回应性照护,会使用评估照护者与儿童互动质量的工具,然而,关于这些工具目前如何被使用和/或调整,特别是在低收入和中等收入国家(LMICs),儿童面临更大概率的不良后果的情况下,几乎没有相关信息。本综述的目的是提供一份关于用于评估照护者与儿童互动的方法的综合指南——包括它们的可行性和文化适应性。

设计/方法:我们对在低收入和中等收入国家进行的、评估照护者与儿童互动的20年研究进行了系统综述。报告了每种工具的特征、它们的效度(使用COSMIN偏倚风险清单评估)以及研究的质量(混合方法评估工具)。

结果

我们在20个不同的低收入和中等收入国家中,识别出59项使用34种工具的研究。大多数工具(86.5%)采用在家中(如安斯沃思敏感性量表、OMI)或实验室(如PICCOLO)对照护者与儿童互动进行视频记录观察,少数在实地进行直接观察(如OMCI、HOME);13.5%是自我报告的。工具在方法上各不相同,对效度和信度的提及有限或没有提及。大多数工具是在西方国家开发的,尚未在低收入和中等收入国家环境中进行文化验证。

结论

在低收入和中等收入国家环境中使用的照护者与儿童互动测量方法有限,只有一些在当地得到验证。未来的研究应旨在确保照护者与儿童互动工具在全球环境中的更好效度、适用性和可行性。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验