@article{ref1,
title="Surveillance bias in child maltreatment: a tempest in a teapot",
journal="International journal of environmental research and public health",
year="2017",
author="Drake, Brett and Jonson-Reid, Melissa and Kim, Hyunil",
volume="14",
number="9",
pages="e14090971-e14090971",
abstract="BACKGROUND: Children are believed to be more likely to be reported for maltreatment while they are working with mental health or social service professionals. This &quot;surveillance bias&quot; has been claimed to inflate reporting by fifty percent or more, and has been used to explain why interventions such as home visiting fail to reduce official maltreatment reporting rates. <br><br>METHODS: We use national child abuse reporting data (n = 825,763), supplemented by more detailed regional data from a multi-agency administrative data study (n = 7185). We determine the percentage of all re-reports made uniquely by mental health and social service providers within and across generations, the report sources which could be subject to surveillance bias. <br><br>RESULTS: At three years after the initial Child protective services (CPS) report, the total percentage of national reports uniquely made by mental health or social service providers is less than 10%, making it impossible that surveillance bias could massively inflate CPS reporting in this sample. Analysis of national data find evidence of a very small (+4.54%) initial surveillance bias &quot;bump&quot; among served cases which decays to +1.84% within three years. Our analysis of regional data showed similar or weaker effects. <br><br>CONCLUSIONS: Surveillance bias effects appear to exist, but are very small.<p /> <p>Language: en</p>",
language="en",
issn="1661-7827",
doi="10.3390/ijerph14090971",
url="http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph14090971"
}