U.S. child death review programs: Assessing progress toward a standard review process

Jenelle Shanley, Elizabeth C. Risch, Barbara L. Bonner

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

19 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: Child death review (CDR) programs examine the circumstances of children's deaths to gain information on how and why children die for the purpose of promoting the health, safety, and protection of children. Purpose: The purpose of this study was to conduct a systematic review of the 50 states and District of Columbia CDR programs, with specific focus on the use of standardized procedures and best-practice recommendations. This included assessment of which deaths are reviewed, the model of review, team membership, and standardization of data collection and reporting. Methods: Data were collected through semistructured phone interviews with representatives of the 50 states and District of Columbia CDR programs and online sources. Data collection and analyses were conducted in 2009. Results: Forty-eight states and the District of Columbia have active CDR programs at the state and/or local level, and the majority use a national data collection system. However, results revealed numerous inconsistencies across programs in policies, procedures, and data collection. Conclusions: This study reflects the minimal progress that has been made in the CDR process in the U.S. since the last systematic review of the programs in 2001. The study documents substantial discrepancies among the U.S. CDR programs, affecting the consistency of data obtained by individual states and, ultimately, prevention efforts at the national level. Information from this review can inform CDR programs as they develop and refine procedures and guide future research on the effectiveness and limitations of variations in procedures.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)522-528
Number of pages7
JournalAmerican Journal of Preventive Medicine
Volume39
Issue number6
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2010

Fingerprint

Practice Guidelines
Information Systems
Research Design
Interviews
Safety
Health

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Epidemiology
  • Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health

Cite this

@article{1b31f915dd58467d91873fdff38fbb67,
title = "U.S. child death review programs: Assessing progress toward a standard review process",
abstract = "Background: Child death review (CDR) programs examine the circumstances of children's deaths to gain information on how and why children die for the purpose of promoting the health, safety, and protection of children. Purpose: The purpose of this study was to conduct a systematic review of the 50 states and District of Columbia CDR programs, with specific focus on the use of standardized procedures and best-practice recommendations. This included assessment of which deaths are reviewed, the model of review, team membership, and standardization of data collection and reporting. Methods: Data were collected through semistructured phone interviews with representatives of the 50 states and District of Columbia CDR programs and online sources. Data collection and analyses were conducted in 2009. Results: Forty-eight states and the District of Columbia have active CDR programs at the state and/or local level, and the majority use a national data collection system. However, results revealed numerous inconsistencies across programs in policies, procedures, and data collection. Conclusions: This study reflects the minimal progress that has been made in the CDR process in the U.S. since the last systematic review of the programs in 2001. The study documents substantial discrepancies among the U.S. CDR programs, affecting the consistency of data obtained by individual states and, ultimately, prevention efforts at the national level. Information from this review can inform CDR programs as they develop and refine procedures and guide future research on the effectiveness and limitations of variations in procedures.",
author = "Jenelle Shanley and Risch, {Elizabeth C.} and Bonner, {Barbara L.}",
year = "2010",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.amepre.2010.08.010",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "39",
pages = "522--528",
journal = "American Journal of Preventive Medicine",
issn = "0749-3797",
publisher = "Elsevier Inc.",
number = "6",

}

U.S. child death review programs : Assessing progress toward a standard review process. / Shanley, Jenelle; Risch, Elizabeth C.; Bonner, Barbara L.

In: American Journal of Preventive Medicine, Vol. 39, No. 6, 01.01.2010, p. 522-528.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - U.S. child death review programs

T2 - Assessing progress toward a standard review process

AU - Shanley, Jenelle

AU - Risch, Elizabeth C.

AU - Bonner, Barbara L.

PY - 2010/1/1

Y1 - 2010/1/1

N2 - Background: Child death review (CDR) programs examine the circumstances of children's deaths to gain information on how and why children die for the purpose of promoting the health, safety, and protection of children. Purpose: The purpose of this study was to conduct a systematic review of the 50 states and District of Columbia CDR programs, with specific focus on the use of standardized procedures and best-practice recommendations. This included assessment of which deaths are reviewed, the model of review, team membership, and standardization of data collection and reporting. Methods: Data were collected through semistructured phone interviews with representatives of the 50 states and District of Columbia CDR programs and online sources. Data collection and analyses were conducted in 2009. Results: Forty-eight states and the District of Columbia have active CDR programs at the state and/or local level, and the majority use a national data collection system. However, results revealed numerous inconsistencies across programs in policies, procedures, and data collection. Conclusions: This study reflects the minimal progress that has been made in the CDR process in the U.S. since the last systematic review of the programs in 2001. The study documents substantial discrepancies among the U.S. CDR programs, affecting the consistency of data obtained by individual states and, ultimately, prevention efforts at the national level. Information from this review can inform CDR programs as they develop and refine procedures and guide future research on the effectiveness and limitations of variations in procedures.

AB - Background: Child death review (CDR) programs examine the circumstances of children's deaths to gain information on how and why children die for the purpose of promoting the health, safety, and protection of children. Purpose: The purpose of this study was to conduct a systematic review of the 50 states and District of Columbia CDR programs, with specific focus on the use of standardized procedures and best-practice recommendations. This included assessment of which deaths are reviewed, the model of review, team membership, and standardization of data collection and reporting. Methods: Data were collected through semistructured phone interviews with representatives of the 50 states and District of Columbia CDR programs and online sources. Data collection and analyses were conducted in 2009. Results: Forty-eight states and the District of Columbia have active CDR programs at the state and/or local level, and the majority use a national data collection system. However, results revealed numerous inconsistencies across programs in policies, procedures, and data collection. Conclusions: This study reflects the minimal progress that has been made in the CDR process in the U.S. since the last systematic review of the programs in 2001. The study documents substantial discrepancies among the U.S. CDR programs, affecting the consistency of data obtained by individual states and, ultimately, prevention efforts at the national level. Information from this review can inform CDR programs as they develop and refine procedures and guide future research on the effectiveness and limitations of variations in procedures.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=79952279216&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=79952279216&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.amepre.2010.08.010

DO - 10.1016/j.amepre.2010.08.010

M3 - Article

C2 - 21084072

AN - SCOPUS:79952279216

VL - 39

SP - 522

EP - 528

JO - American Journal of Preventive Medicine

JF - American Journal of Preventive Medicine

SN - 0749-3797

IS - 6

ER -