The neglect of child neglect: a meta-analytic review of the prevalence of neglect
By M. Stoltenborgh, M. Bakermans‐Kranenburg, Marinus H. van IJzendoorn. Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology, 2012
663 citations recorded by the source corpus.
PurposeThe aim of the current meta-analysis was to provide an estimate of the prevalence of physical and emotional neglect by integrating prevalence figures from the body of research reporting on neglect. An attempt was also made to unravel the substantial variation in prevalence figures reported in primary studies by analyzing the effects of procedural factors and sample characteristics on combined prevalence rates.MethodsStudies providing prevalence rates of child neglect were searched using electronic databases, exploring specialized journals, and by searching references of publications for other relevant studies. Data were extracted using a coding system. Intercoder reliability was satisfactory. A comprehensive meta-analysis was conducted.ResultsChild physical neglect prevalence rates were found for 13 independent samples with a total of 59,406 participants, and child emotional neglect prevalence rates were found for 16 independent samples with a total of 59,655 participants. The overall estimated prevalence was 163/1,000 for physical neglect, and 184/1,000 for emotional neglect, with no apparent gender differences. The influence of research design factors on the prevalence of physical neglect was more pronounced than on the prevalence of emotional neglect. Studies on physical neglect in ‘low-resource’ countries were conspicuously absent.ConclusionsChild neglect is a problem of considerable extent, but seems to be a neglected type of maltreatment in scientific research. This is illustrated by the deplorable dearth of studies on child neglect, especially in low-resource countries. Recommendations for the design of future prevalence studies are proposed.
Subfields: Clinical Psychology, Demography, Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/24d29860e3423b876783ec5203660451b2314250
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
In Clinical Psychology
In Demography
Citations in the corpus
- Magnitude and Risk Factors for Interpersonal Violence Experienced by Canadian Teenagers in the Sport Context (2020, background): “Given that prevalence rates of bullying (cyber and traditional; Jadambaa et al., 2019), neglect (Stoltenborgh et al., 2013), and emotional abuse (Stoltenborgh et al., 2012) do not present differences between sex in the general population, and that (b) the same results were obtained in sport for…”