skip navigation

PUBLICATIONS

Register for Latest Research

Stay Informed
Register with NCJRS to receive NCJRS's biweekly e-newsletter JUSTINFO and additional periodic emails from NCJRS and the NCJRS federal sponsors that highlight the latest research published or sponsored by the Office of Justice Programs.

NCJRS Abstract

The document referenced below is part of the NCJRS Virtual Library collection. To conduct further searches of the collection, visit the Virtual Library. See the Obtain Documents page for direction on how to access resources online, via mail, through interlibrary loans, or in a local library.

 

NCJ Number: 220877 Find in a Library
Title: Randomized Controlled Trial of Consensus-Based Child Abuse Case Management
Journal: Child Abuse & Neglect: The International Journal  Volume:31  Issue:9  Dated:September 2007  Pages:919-933
Author(s): L. Goldbeck; A. Laib-Koehnemund; J.M. Fegert
Date Published: September 2007
Page Count: 15
Publisher: http://www.elsevier.com 
Type: Report (Study/Research)
Format: Article
Language: English
Country: United States of America
Annotation: This study evaluated the effects of expert-assisted child abuse and neglect case management within the German child welfare and healthcare systems.
Abstract: The results of this study indicate expert assisted case management is generally not effective. There are no specialized child protective services available in Germany, and children may be processed either within the child welfare system, the legal system, or the healthcare system with little or no coordination between agencies. Expert-assisted case management might change the case workers’ perception of the evidence for abuse and guide their interventions to provide child protection, but generally case workers did not perceive intervention as effective; modifications to the current method could improve children’s participation. Social workers, physicians, psychologists, psychotherapists, and counselors for 12 different institutions in the German State of Baden-Wuerttemberg participated in the study. A consecutive series of 80 newly recognized or suspected cases of child abuse or neglect were enrolled in the study during the recruitment period: 58 cases were from the child welfare system, and 22 cases were reported by clinicians from the health care system. Each case was randomly assigned either to the intervention group or the control group. In the intervention condition, the case workers were contacted by a child protection expert to hold an initial case conference within 4 weeks of reporting the case. In urgent cases, the first case conference was held within a few days. A minimum of one and a maximum of five followup case conferences were conducted within the intervention period of 6 months. The intervention was performed by experts with practical expertise in child protection. Written protocols completed at the end of each session recorded the definition of case-specific goals concerning further investigation, diagnosis or intervention, and evaluation of goal attainment was recorded at the following case conference. Future studies should integrate more sophisticated methods for the evaluation of the effectiveness of interventions for child abuse and/or neglect, including multi-informant strategies. Tables, references
Main Term(s): Case management; Caseload management; Child protection services; Childcare worker casework; Germany
Index Term(s): Abused children; Assessment (child health and welfare); Child welfare; Children at risk; Crimes against children
To cite this abstract, use the following link:
http://www.ncjrs.gov/App/publications/abstract.aspx?ID=242709

*A link to the full-text document is provided whenever possible. For documents not available online, a link to the publisher's website is provided. Tell us how you use the NCJRS Library and Abstracts Database - send us your feedback.