Cochrane · systematic review · CD011775
Child protection training for professionals to improve reporting of child abuse and neglect
Walsh, K, Eggins, E, Hine, L, et al. · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · 2022 · Cochrane Library
Developmental, Psychosocial and Learning ProblemsAMSTAR 2: not assessed
SoF tableOnly the outcomes this review put in its Summary of Findings table are listed (the Cochrane Handbook caps them at about seven per comparison). Its other analyses are not shown here.
Questions
10
current version
GRADE rated
7
No studies
0
Included studies
NR
No studies 0 · 0%Ungraded 3 · 30%Very low 6 · 60%Low 1 · 10%Moderate 0 · 0%High 0 · 0%
Ungraded means an effect was reported without a GRADE rating; it is not a gap. No studies means the review found nothing to answer the question. The six categories are a display order, not a score.
Questions and results
Child protection training for professionals to improve reporting of child abuse and neglect compared with no training, waitlist control, or alternative training not related to child abuse and neglect (primary outcomes)
Population: postqualified professionals, including elementary and high school teachers, childcare professionals, medical practitioners, nurses, and mental health professionals
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Number of reported cases of child abuse and neglect (professionals' self‐report, actual cases) Time of outcome assessment: short term (3 months postintervention) Child protection training for professionals to improve reporting of child abuse and neglect vs no training, waitlist control, or alternative training not related to child abuse and neglect (primary outcomes) | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 42 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, indirectness |
Number of reported cases of child abuse and neglect (professionals' self‐report, hypothetical vignette cases) Time of outcome assessment: short term (postintervention) Child protection training for professionals to improve reporting of child abuse and neglect vs no training, waitlist control, or alternative training not related to child abuse and neglect (primary outcomes) | no estimate extracted | 2 studies · 87 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, indirectness |
Number of reported cases of child abuse and neglect (official records of reports made to child protection authorities) Child protection training for professionals to improve reporting of child abuse and neglect vs no training, waitlist control, or alternative training not related to child abuse and neglect (primary outcomes) | no estimate extracted | 0 studies · 0 participants | Ungraded |
Quality of reported cases of child abuse and neglect (official records of reports made to child protection authorities) Child protection training for professionals to improve reporting of child abuse and neglect vs no training, waitlist control, or alternative training not related to child abuse and neglect (primary outcomes) | no estimate extracted | 0 studies · 0 participants | Ungraded |
Adverse events Child protection training for professionals to improve reporting of child abuse and neglect vs no training, waitlist control, or alternative training not related to child abuse and neglect (primary outcomes) | no estimate extracted | 0 studies · 0 participants | Ungraded |
Child protection training for professionals to improve reporting of child abuse and neglect compared with no training, waitlist control, or alternative training not related to child abuse and neglect (secondary outcomes)
Population: postqualified professionals, including elementary and high school teachers, childcare professionals, medical practitioners, nurses, and mental health professionals
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Knowledge of reporting duty, processes, and procedures Measured by: professionals' self‐reported knowledge of jurisdictional or institutional reporting duties, or both Time of outcome assessment: short term (postintervention) Child protection training for professionals to improve reporting of child abuse and neglect vs no training, waitlist control, or alternative training not related to child abuse and neglect (secondary outcomes) | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 744 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias, indirectness |
Knowledge of core concepts in child abuse and neglect (all forms) Measured by: professionals' self‐reported knowledge of all forms of child abuse and neglect (general measure) Time of outcome assessment: short term (postintervention) Child protection training for professionals to improve reporting of child abuse and neglect vs no training, waitlist control, or alternative training not related to child abuse and neglect (secondary outcomes) | no estimate extracted | 2 studies · 154 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, indirectness |
Knowledge of core concepts in child abuse and neglect (child sexual abuse only) Measured by: professionals' self‐reported knowledge of child sexual abuse (specific measure) Time of outcome assessment: short term (postintervention) Child protection training for professionals to improve reporting of child abuse and neglect vs no training, waitlist control, or alternative training not related to child abuse and neglect (secondary outcomes) | no estimate extracted | 3 studies · 238 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, inconsistency, indirectness |
Skill in distinguishing between reportable and non‐reportable child abuse and neglect cases Measured by: professionals’ performance on simulated cases scored by trained and blinded expert panel Time of outcome assessment: short term (postintervent... Child protection training for professionals to improve reporting of child abuse and neglect vs no training, waitlist control, or alternative training not related to child abuse and neglect (secondary outcomes) | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 25 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, indirectness |
Attitudes toward the duty to report child abuse and neglect Measured by: professionals’ self‐reported attitudes towards the duty to report child abuse and neglect Time of outcome assessment: short term (postintervention) Child protection training for professionals to improve reporting of child abuse and neglect vs no training, waitlist control, or alternative training not related to child abuse and neglect (secondary outcomes) | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 741 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, indirectness |