Administration of Childhood Physical and Childhood Sexual Abuse Screens in Adolescents and Young Adults: a Literature Review

BACKGROUND: Childhood physical and sexual abuse can have a negative impact on adolescents and young adults. Although effective interventions that can ameliorate both the short- and long-term negative impacts are available, many adolescent and young adult victims remain without help: They rarely self-identify as victims, and health care providers generally fail to inquire about a history of childhood abuse, especially in the absence of physical signs. The health care field lacks an understanding of effective methods for the identification of childhood abuse. OBJECTIVES: To address this knowledge gap, this paper focuses on a systematic review of the literature for studies comparing modes of administration of measures to identify a history of childhood physical and sexual abuse in adolescents and young adults. METHODS: A systematic review of the literature published in English in peer-reviewed journals between January 1, 1994, and December 31, 2014 was conducted to identify studies that compared 2 or more modes of administration using the same measure to identify a history of childhood physical and sexual abuse in adolescent and young adult populations. Studies that compared 2 or more different measures for identifying abuse were not included in this review because the focus of the review was to isolate the effects of the mode of administration. FINDINGS: Only 1 study that met review criteria was found. It was conducted among female college students in a university setting. No studies were identified that compared modes of administration used to elicit disclosure of a history of childhood abuse among adolescents. CONCLUSIONS: There remains an urgent need to conduct evaluations of methods to identify childhood physical and sexual abuse including the mode of administration of screens in young people. It is recommended that future studies include diverse populations and randomized and quasi-experimental approaches.

Abstract licence: CC BY

1. 58.

   The PRISMA Statement for Reporting Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses of Studies That Evaluate Health Care Interventions: Explanation and Elaboration · 2009

59 more references, whose wording the paper’s licence keeps private.

A person counts once a day per paper. We keep no cookie and no address: a reader is a hash that changes every day. Any month under five reads shows no number.