当前位置:
X-MOL 学术
›
Child Abuse Review
›
论文详情
Our official English website, www.x-mol.net, welcomes your feedback! (Note: you will need to create a separate account there.)
Findings from a Thematic Multidisciplinary Analysis of Child Practice Reviews in Wales
Child Abuse Review ( IF 2.086 ) Pub Date : 2021-03-02 , DOI: 10.1002/car.2679 Alyson M. Rees 1 , Roxanna Fatemi‐Dehaghani 2 , Thomas Slater 1 , Rachel Swann 1 , Amanda L. Robinson 1
Child Abuse Review ( IF 2.086 ) Pub Date : 2021-03-02 , DOI: 10.1002/car.2679 Alyson M. Rees 1 , Roxanna Fatemi‐Dehaghani 2 , Thomas Slater 1 , Rachel Swann 1 , Amanda L. Robinson 1
Affiliation
In this paper, we report findings from a qualitative, multidisciplinary analysis of 20 Child Practice Reviews (CPRs) (previously Serious Case Review) in Wales. The reviews were analysed from three different disciplinary perspectives: law, criminology and practice (social work). The following cross‐cutting themes were identified from our coding of the reviews: (i) hierarchy of knowledge, where certain sources of knowledge were privileged over others; (ii) information sharing/recording, where deficiencies of sharing or recording of information were evident; (iii) partial assessment, where certain assessments were not always holistic; and lastly, (iv) voice of the child, where the experience or perspective of the child was not always considered. In addition, our analysis revealed a range of challenges to the CPR process as implemented. This paper is the first to explore themes emerging from (Welsh) CPRs and is also the first to do so from a multidisciplinary perspective. We conclude by highlighting the recommendations for practice, such as the need for greater learning pan‐Wales, regular publication of the major themes emerging from CPRs and the need for deposit of CPRs in a central repository to facilitate learning from reviews.
中文翻译:
威尔士儿童实践评论的多学科专题分析发现
在本文中,我们报告了对威尔士20项儿童实践评论(CPR)(以前称为“严重病例回顾”)的定性,多学科分析。从三个不同的学科角度对评论进行了分析:法律,犯罪学和实践(社会工作)。从我们的评审编码中确定了以下跨领域主题:(i)知识层次,其中某些知识源比其他知识源具有特权;(ii)信息共享/记录,如果信息共享或记录存在明显缺陷;(iii)部分评估,其中某些评估并不总是整体的;最后,(iv)儿童的声音,但并不总是考虑儿童的经验或观点。此外,我们的分析揭示了实施CPR过程中的一系列挑战。本文是第一个探讨(威尔士)CPR出现的主题的论文,也是第一个从多学科角度进行研究的主题。作为总结,我们着重强调了一些实践建议,例如需要更多的泛泛学习,定期发布心肺复苏术产生的主要主题以及需要将心肺复苏术存放在中央存储库中,以利于从审核中学习。
更新日期:2021-03-02
中文翻译:
威尔士儿童实践评论的多学科专题分析发现
在本文中,我们报告了对威尔士20项儿童实践评论(CPR)(以前称为“严重病例回顾”)的定性,多学科分析。从三个不同的学科角度对评论进行了分析:法律,犯罪学和实践(社会工作)。从我们的评审编码中确定了以下跨领域主题:(i)知识层次,其中某些知识源比其他知识源具有特权;(ii)信息共享/记录,如果信息共享或记录存在明显缺陷;(iii)部分评估,其中某些评估并不总是整体的;最后,(iv)儿童的声音,但并不总是考虑儿童的经验或观点。此外,我们的分析揭示了实施CPR过程中的一系列挑战。本文是第一个探讨(威尔士)CPR出现的主题的论文,也是第一个从多学科角度进行研究的主题。作为总结,我们着重强调了一些实践建议,例如需要更多的泛泛学习,定期发布心肺复苏术产生的主要主题以及需要将心肺复苏术存放在中央存储库中,以利于从审核中学习。