Sử Dụng Đánh Giá Rủi Ro Để Dự Đoán Lạm Dụng Lặp Lại: Phân Tích Cây Phân Loại và Hồi Quy (CART)

Prevention Science - Tập 9 - Trang 28-37 - 2008
Eve M. Sledjeski1, Lisa C. Dierker1, Rebecca Brigham1, Eileen Breslin2
1Department of Psychology, Wesleyan University, Middletown, USA
2Department of Children and Families, Middletown, USA

Tóm tắt

Nghiên cứu đã đề xuất rằng việc lạm dụng lặp lại có thể được dự đoán tốt nhất bởi sự kết hợp của các yếu tố khác nhau giữa các gia đình. Nghiên cứu hiện tại nhằm xác định xem liệu phương pháp phân tích dựa trên mẫu có thể dự đoán tốt hơn các gia đình có nguy cơ cao về lạm dụng lặp lại so với các phương pháp hồi quy logistic hay không. Dữ liệu lưu trữ từ các cuộc điều tra đã được xác nhận trong năm 2003 đã được thu thập từ một chi nhánh của Bộ Trẻ em và Gia đình Connecticut. Có 244 gia đình có trường hợp chỉ số đã được xác nhận được theo dõi trong 18 tháng để xác định sự hiện diện của các trường hợp đã được xác nhận bổ sung trong hệ thống CPS. Phân tích Cây Phân Loại và Hồi Quy (CART) đã chỉ ra rằng việc tham gia CPS trước đó là yếu tố dự đoán tốt nhất cho việc lạm dụng lặp lại. Hơn nữa, các yếu tố rủi ro liên quan đến việc lặp lại khác nhau đối với các gia đình đã và chưa từng bị điều tra bởi CPS. Các gia đình chỉ có các cuộc điều tra CPS không được xác nhận trước đó và trẻ em không được nhìn thấy nhiều trong cộng đồng có nguy cơ cao về lặp lại. Các gia đình chưa từng có sự tham gia CPS trước đó, không tham gia tích cực vào việc lập kế hoạch trường hợp và có lịch sử bạo lực gia đình cũng có nguy cơ cao về lặp lại. Những phát hiện này cho thấy rằng phân tích dựa trên mẫu có thể là một phương pháp hữu ích để cung cấp thông tin về các yếu tố dự đoán lạm dụng lặp lại theo từng địa điểm bằng cách tạo ra các điểm quyết định rõ ràng phân định các nhóm có nguy cơ cao.

Từ khóa

#lạm dụng; lặp lại; phân tích cây; đánh giá rủi ro; hệ thống CPS

Tài liệu tham khảo

Baird, C. (1988). Development of risk assessment indices for the Alaska Department of Health and Social Services. In T. Tatara (Ed.), Validation research in CPS risk assessment: Three recent studies (Vol. Occasional Monograph Series No. 2). Washington, DC: American Public Welfare Association. Baird, C., & Wagner, D. (2000). The relative validity of actuarial- and consensus-based risk assessment systems. Children and Youth Services Review, 22, 839. Bates, M. E. (2000). Integrating person-centered and variable-centered approaches in the study of developmental courses and transitions in alcohol use: Introduction to the special section. Alcoholism Clinical and Experimental Research, 24, 878–881. Belsky, J. (1993). Etiology of child maltreatment: A developmental-ecological analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 114, 413–434. Breiman, L., Friedman, J. H., Ohlsen, R. A., and Stone, C. J. (1984). Classification and regression trees. Belmont: Wadsworth International Group. Brookes, D., & Webster, D. (1999). Child welfare in the United States: Policy, practice and innovations in service delivery. International Journal of Social Welfare, 8, 297–307. Brown, B. W., & Hollander, M. (1977). Statistics: A biomedical introduction. New York: Wiley. Camasso, M. J., & Jagannathan, R. (1995). Prediction accuracy of the Washington and Illinois risk assessment instruments: An application of receiver operating characteristic curve analysis. Social Work Research, 19, 174–183. Cash, S. J. (2001). Risk assessment in child welfare: The art and science. Children and Youth Services Review, 23, 811. Cicchetti, D., & Toth, S. L. (1995). A developmental psychopathology perspective on child abuse and neglect (Special Article). Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 34, 541–565. DePanfilis, D., & Zuravin, S. J. (1998). Rates, patterns, and frequency of child maltreatment recurrences among families known to CPS. Child Maltreatment, 3, 27–42. DePanfilis, D., & Zuravin, S. J. (1999). Epidemiology of child maltreatment recurrences. Social Service Review, 73, 218–239. English, D. J., Marshall, D. B., & Orme, M. (1999). Characteristics of repeated referrals to child protective services in Washington State. Child Maltreatment, 4, 297–307. Fluke, J. D., Shusterman, G. R., Hollinshead, D., & Yuan, Y. (2005). Rereporting and recurrence of child maltreatment: Findings from NCANDS. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation. Fluke, J. D., Yuan, Y.-Y. T., & Edwards, M. (1999). Recurrence of maltreatment: An application of the National Child Abuse and Neglect Data System (NCANDS). Child Abuse & Neglect, 23, 633–650. Fryer, G. E., & Miyoshi, T. J. (1994). A survival analysis of the revictimization of children: The case of Colorado. Child Abuse & Neglect, 18, 1063–1071. Fuller, T. L., Wells, S. J., & Cotton, E. E. (2001). Predictors of maltreatment recurrence at two milestones in the life of a case. Children and Youth Services Review, 23, 49–78. Gambrill, E., & Shlonsky, A. (2000). Risk assessment in context. Children and Youth Services Review, 22, 813–837. Garbarino, J. (1977). The human ecology of child maltreatment: A conceptual model for research. Journal of Marriage & the Family, 39, 721–735. Hamilton, C. E., & Browne, K. D. (1999). Recurrent maltreatment during childhood: A survey of referrals to police child protection units in England. Child Maltreatment 4, 275–286. Higgins, D. J., & McCabe, M. P. (2000). Multi-type maltreatment and the long-term adjustment of adults. Child Abuse Review, 9, 6–18. Higgins, D. J., & McCabe, M. P. (2001). Multiple forms of child abuse and neglect: Adult retrospective reports. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 6, 547–578. Hindley, N., Ramchandani, P. G., & Jones, D. P. (2006). Risk factors for recurrence of maltreatment: A systematic review. Archives of Disease in Childhood, 91, 744–752. Howing, P. T., Wodarski, J. S., Kurtz, P., & Gaudin, J. M. (1989). Methodological issues in child maltreatment research. Social Work Research & Abstracts 25, 3–7. Inkelas, M., & Halfon, N. (1997). Recidivism in child protective services. Children and Youth Services Review, 19, 139. Jagannathan, R., & Camasso, M. J. (1996). Risk assessment in child protective services: A canonical analysis of the case management function. Child Abuse & Neglect, 20, 599–612. Johnson, M. A., Brown, C. H., & Wells, S. J. (2002). Using classification and regression tress (CART) to support worker decision making. Social Work Research, 26, 19–29. Johnson, W., & L’Esperance, J. (1984). Predicting the recurrence of child abuse. Social Work Research & Abstracts, 20, 21–26. Knoke, D., & Trocme, N. (2005). Reviewing the evidence on assessing risk for child abuse and neglect. Brief Treatment and Crisis Intervention, 5, 310–327. Kraemer, H. C. (1992). Evaluating medical tests. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications, Inc. Lau, A. S., Leeb, R. T., English, D., Graham, J., Briggs, E. C., Brody, K. E., et al. (2005). What’s in a name? A comparison of methods for classifying predominant type of maltreatment. Child Abuse & Neglect, 29, 533–551. Lemon, S. C., Roy, J., Clark, M. A., Friedmann, P. D., & Rakowski, W. (2003). Classification and regression tree analysis in public health: Methodological review and comparison with logistic regression. Annals of Behavioral Medicine, 26, 172–181. Levy, H. B., Markovic, J., Chaudhry, U., Ahart, S., & Torres, H. (1995). Reabuse rates in a sample of children followed for 5 years after discharge from a child abuse inpatient assessment program. Child Abuse & Neglect, 19, 1363. Lewis, R. J. (2000). An introduction to classification and regression tree (CART) analysis. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine, San Francisco, CA. Lipien, L., & Forthofer, M. S. (2004). An event history analysis of recurrent child maltreatment reports in Florida. Child Abuse & Neglect, 28, 947. Litrownik, A. J., Lau, A., English, D. J., Briggs, E., Newton, R. R., Romney, S., et al. (2005). Measuring the severity of child maltreatment. Child Abuse & Neglect, 29, 553–573. Lyons, P., Doueck, H. J., & Wodarski, J. S. (1996). Risk assessment for child protective services: A review of the empirical literature on instrument performance. Social Work Research 20, 143–155. Magnusson, D. (1998). The logic and implications of a person-oriented approach. In R. B. Cairns, L. R. Bergman & J. Kagan (Eds.), Methods and models for studying the individual (pp. 33–62). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Marks, J., & McDonald, T. (1989). Predicting recurrence of maltreatment. Risk assessment in child protective services (vol. 4). National Child Welfare Resource Center for Management and Administration. Marshall, D. B., & English, D. J. (1999). Survival analysis of risk factors for recidivism in child abuse and neglect. Child Maltreatment, 4, 287–296. McDonald, T., & Marks, J. (1991). A review of risk factors assessed in child protective services. Social Service Review, 65, 112–132. Murphy-Berman, V. (1994). A conceptual framework for thinking about risk assessment and case management in child protective service. Child Abuse & Neglect, 18, 193–201. National Research Council (1993). Panel on research on child abuse and neglect. Understanding child abuse and neglect. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. Pecora, P. J. (1991). Investigating allegations of child maltreatment: The strengths and limitations of current risk assessment systems. Child & Youth Services, 15, 73–92. Rittner, B. (2002). The use of risk assessment instruments in child protective services case planning and closures. Children and Youth Services Review, 24, 189–207. Rycus, J. S., & Hughes, R. C. (2003). Issues in risk assessment in child protective services: Policy white paper. Columbus, OH: North American Resource Center for Child Welfare. Schwalbe, C. (2004). Re-visioning risk assessment for human service decision making. Children and Youth Services Review, 26, 561. Shlonsky, A., & Wagner, D. (2005). The next step: Integrating actuarial risk assessment and clinical judgment into an evidence-based practice framework in CPS case management. Children and Youth Services Review, 27, 409–427. Steinberg, D., & Colla, P. (1997). CART–Classification and regression trees. San Diego, CA: Salford Systems. US Department of Health and Human Services (2003). National study of child protective services systems and reform efforts: Review of State CPS Policy. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office. Wald, M. S., & Woolverton, M. (1990). Risk assessment: The emperor’s new clothes? Child Welfare, 69, 483–511. Weedon, J., Torti, T., & Zunder, P. (1988). Vermont division of social services family risk assessment matrix: Research and evaluation. In T. Tatara (Ed.), Validation Research in CPS Risk Assessment: Three Recent Studies. (Occational Monograph Series No.2). Washington D.C.: American Public Welfare Association. Wolock, I., Sherman, P., Feldman, L. H., & Metzger, B. (2001). Child abuse and neglect referral patterns: A longitudinal study. Children and Youth Services Review, 23, 21. Wood, J. M. (1997). Risk predictors for re-abuse or re-neglect in a predominantly Hispanic population. Child Abuse & Neglect, 21, 379.