Department of Education and Childhood Studies, School of Social Sciences, Swansea University, Swansea, Wales, SA2 8PP, UK.
Centre for Development, Evaluation, Complexity and Implementation in Public Health Improvement (DECIPHer), School of Social Sciences, SPARK, Cardiff University, Cardiff, CF24 4HQ, UK.
BMC Public Health. 2024 Oct 21;24(1):2912. doi: 10.1186/s12889-024-20204-6.
Research consistently finds poorer health and educational outcomes for children who have experienced out-of-home care relative to the general population. Few studies have explored differences between those in care and those in receipt of intervention from social services but not in care. Children receiving social services interventions often experience Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACEs), and deprivation, which are known to negatively impact outcomes. We aimed to estimate the association of different social services interventions with educational outcomes and hospital admissions, while adjusting for ACEs and deprivation.
We linked retrospective, routinely collected administrative records from health, education, and social care to create a cohort via the Secure Anonymised Information Linkage (SAIL) databank in Wales, UK. We analysed data for children and household members (N = 30,439) across four different groups: [1] no social care intervention; [2] children in need but not in care (CIN); [3] children on the Child Protection Register but not in care (CPR); [4] children in care - i.e. removed from the family home and looked after by the local authority (CLA). Our primary outcome was education outcomes at age 16 years. Secondary outcomes were all cause emergency hospital admissions, and emergency admissions for external causes/injuries.
Children in receipt of social services intervention were more likely to not attain the expected level upon leaving statutory education at age 16 after adjusting for ACEs and other characteristics (for children who had been in out-of-home care (conditional OR: 1·76, (95%CI) 1·25 - 2·48), in need (2·51, 2·00-3·15) and those at risk (i.e., on the child protection register) (4·04, 2·44 - 6·68). For all-cause emergency admissions, all social care groups were at greater risk compared to children in the general population (children in care (conditional HR: 1·31, 1·01-1·68), children in need (1·62, 1·38 - 1·90), and children at risk (1·51, 1·11 - 2·04).
All groups receiving social service intervention experience poorer educational and health outcomes than peers in the general population. Children who remain with their home parents or caregivers but are identified as 'in need' or 'at risk' by social care practitioners require further research. Integrated support is needed from multiple sectors, including health, educational and social care.
研究一致发现,经历过家庭外照顾的儿童与一般人群相比,健康状况和教育成果较差。很少有研究探讨接受社会服务干预但不在照顾中的儿童与在照顾中的儿童之间的差异。接受社会服务干预的儿童经常经历不良的儿童经历(ACEs)和贫困,这些因素已知会对结果产生负面影响。我们旨在估计不同社会服务干预措施与教育成果和住院治疗之间的关联,同时调整 ACEs 和贫困因素。
我们通过英国威尔士的安全匿名信息链接(SAIL)数据库,将来自健康、教育和社会关怀的回顾性、常规收集的行政记录进行链接,创建了一个队列。我们分析了四个不同组别的儿童和家庭成员的数据(N=30439):[1] 无社会关怀干预;[2] 有需要但不在照顾中的儿童(CIN);[3] 在儿童保护登记册中但不在照顾中的儿童(CPR);[4] 在照顾中的儿童 - 即被从家庭中带走并由地方当局照顾(CLA)。我们的主要结果是 16 岁时的教育成果。次要结果是所有原因的紧急住院治疗和因外部原因/受伤的紧急住院治疗。
在调整 ACEs 和其他特征后,接受社会服务干预的儿童在 16 岁离开法定教育时更有可能未达到预期水平(对于曾经离家出走的儿童(条件 OR:1.76,(95%CI)1.25-2.48)、有需要的儿童(2.51,2.00-3.15)和处于危险中的儿童(即,在儿童保护登记册上)(4.04,2.44-6.68)。对于所有原因的紧急住院治疗,所有社会关怀群体的风险都高于一般人群中的儿童(在照顾中的儿童(条件 HR:1.31,1.01-1.68)、有需要的儿童(1.62,1.38-1.90)和处于危险中的儿童(1.51,1.11-2.04)。
所有接受社会服务干预的群体都比一般人群中的同龄人经历更差的教育和健康结果。那些与父母或照顾者一起留在家里但被社会服务工作者认定为“有需要”或“处于危险之中”的儿童需要进一步研究。需要来自健康、教育和社会关怀等多个部门的综合支持。