Developing and testing child abuse measures for a global context – work under construction Franziska Meinck

Background Approximately 1 billion children victims of violence each year (Hillis et al 2016) Child abuse associated with immediate and long-term consequences Risk of intergenerational continuity Vast economic burden (Fang et al 2011) Little robust evidence for what works to prevent violence against children (Mikton et al 2009)

Some background work Rapid review of child abuse measures for WHO European Office Work on the Sinovuyo Teen Child Abuse Prevention Trial Working on a WHO handbook on how to set up child abuse surveillance systems Networking and listening to the “experts”

Two major gaps in methodology impede development of evidence-base Lack of adequate and comparable international survey data Lengthy questionnaires Expensive to conduct No short questionnaire available 2) Lack of child abuse measure for interventions Sensitivity to change in severity and frequency Studies use proxies or agency data

Developing the evidence base Child abuse Measures for Evaluation and Observation: CAMEO – collaboration across multiple sectors Systematic review of child abuse measures Development of ICAST-TRIAL Use of ICAST-TRIAL in six intervention studies Pooling of data and psychometric testing Development of ICAST-SF

Systematic review Extending rapid review done for WHO into systematic review Use of Consensus-based Standards for selection of health status Measurement Instruments Checklist (COSMIN) Registration on ProSPective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO)

ICAST-TRIAL Data pooling (SA, DRC, Philippines, Tanzania – 6 studies) Scoring of ICAST-Trial Psychometric testing – EFA/CFA, measurement invariance across multiple cultural contexts Multi-Trait Multi Method analysis for parent-child report/ parent-child report concordance Construct validity

ICAST-SF BECAN Study 2010 (N=42,000 parent/child dyads in 9 Balkan countries) Focus groups with stakeholders at international child abuse conferences Psychometric testing to reduce item count to 5-7 Prototype inclusion in survey for validation testing

Beware of the network effect! WHO SCMQ – cognitive interviewing Brief Child Abuse Potential Inventory in German sample – validation and gender differences Adverse Childhood Experiences – psychometric testing and validation