Child protection medical assessments: Why do we do them?

Archives of Disease in Childhood

Volumn 95, Issue 5, 2010, Pages 336-340

  Kirk, Charlotte B ^a   Lucas Herald, Angela ^b   Mok, Jacqueline ^a  

^a ROYAL HOSPITAL FOR SICK CHILDREN   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF EDINBURGH   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CHILD; CHILD ABUSE; FEMALE; HUMAN; INFANT; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MEDICAL ASSESSMENT; PHYSICAL ABUSE; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PRESCHOOL CHILD; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROTECTION; SCHOOL CHILD; SEX DIFFERENCE; SEXUAL ABUSE; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

ADOLESCENT; CHILD; CHILD ABUSE; CHILD ABUSE, SEXUAL; CHILD WELFARE; CHILD, PRESCHOOL; FEMALE; HEALTH SERVICES NEEDS AND DEMAND; HUMANS; INFANT; INFANT, NEWBORN; MALE; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT (HEALTH CARE); PHYSICAL EXAMINATION; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; SCOTLAND;

EID: 77953803890     PISSN: 00039888     EISSN: 14682044     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1136/adc.2009.160499     Document Type: Article

References (12)

1. Scottish Executive Health Department. Protecting Children: A Shared Responsibility. Guidance for Health Professionals in Scotland. Edinburgh: Tactica Solutions, 2000.
2. De San Lazaro C. Making paediatric assessment in suspected sexual abuse a therapeutic experience. Arch Dis Child 1995;73:174-6
3. De Jong AR, Rose M. Legal proof of child sexual abuse in the absence of physical evidence. Pediatrics 1991;88:506-11.
4. Palusci VJ, Cox EO, Cyrus TA, et al. Medical assessment and legal outcome in child sexual abuse. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med 1999;153:388-92.
5. Heger A, Ticson L, Velasquez O, et al. Children referred for possible sexual abuse: medical findings in 2384 children. Child Abuse Negl 2002;26:645-59. (Pubitemid 34754323)
6. Girardet R, Giacobbe L, Bolton K, et al. Unmet healthcare needs among children evaluated for sexual assault. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med 2006;160:70-3. (Pubitemid 43042138)
7. Lindberg DM, Lindsell CJ, Shapiro RA. Variability in expert assessments of child physical abuse likelihood. Pediatrics 2008;121:e945-53.
8. Edinburgh and Lothian and Borders Executive Group (ELBEG). Edinburgh and Lothians inter-agency child protection procedures. Edinburgh: Edinburgh, Lothian and Borders Child Protection Office, 2007.
9. Adams JA, Harper K, Knudson S, et al. Examination findings in legally confirmed child sexual abuse: it's normal to be normal. Pediatrics 1994;94:310-17. (Pubitemid 24271472)
10. Watkeys JM, Price LD, Upton PM, et al. The timing of medical examination following an allegation of sexual abuse: is this an emergency? Arch Dis Child 2008;93:851-6.
11. Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health. The physical signs of child sexual abuse. an evidence-based review and guidance for best practice. London: Lavenham Press, 2008.
12. Adams JA, Harper K, Knudson S. A proposed system for the classification of anogenital findings in children with suspected sexual abuse. Adolesc Pediatr Gynecol 1992;5:73-5.