儿童和青少年心理健康服务机构收治的风险率和概况:对伦敦南部 21,688 名青少年的队列和潜类分析

JCPP advances Pub Date : 2024-05-17 DOI:10.1002/jcv2.12246
Barry Coughlan, Matt Woolgar, Rick Hood, Dustin Hutchinson, Ella Denford, Amy Hillier, Keith Clements, Teresa Geraghty, Ava Berry, Paul Bywaters, Andy Bilson, Jack Smith, Taliah Drayak, David Graham, Francesca Crozier-Roche, Robbie Duschinsky
{"title":"儿童和青少年心理健康服务机构收治的风险率和概况:对伦敦南部 21,688 名青少年的队列和潜类分析","authors":"Barry Coughlan,&nbsp;Matt Woolgar,&nbsp;Rick Hood,&nbsp;Dustin Hutchinson,&nbsp;Ella Denford,&nbsp;Amy Hillier,&nbsp;Keith Clements,&nbsp;Teresa Geraghty,&nbsp;Ava Berry,&nbsp;Paul Bywaters,&nbsp;Andy Bilson,&nbsp;Jack Smith,&nbsp;Taliah Drayak,&nbsp;David Graham,&nbsp;Francesca Crozier-Roche,&nbsp;Robbie Duschinsky","doi":"10.1002/jcv2.12246","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>Children and young people (CYP) seen by child and adolescent mental health services (CAMHS) often experience safeguarding issues. Yet little is known about the volume and nature of these risks, including how different adversities or risks relate to one another. This exploratory study aims to bridge this gap, examining rates at entry to services and profiles of risk using a latent class analysis.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>Data were extracted for CYP who received at least one risk assessment at CAMHs in South London between January 2007 and December 2017. In total, there were 21,688 risk assessments. Latent class analysis was used to identify profiles of risk from the risk assessments.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Concerns about parent mental health (<i>n</i> = 5274; 24%), emotional abuse (<i>n</i> = 4487; 21%), violence towards others (<i>n</i> = 4210; 19%), destructive behaviour (<i>n</i> = 4005; 18%), and not attending school (<i>n</i> = 3762; 17%) were the most commonly identified risks. Six distinct profiles of risk were identified from the latent class analyses: (1) maltreatment and externalising behaviours, (2) maltreatment but low risk to self and others, (3) antisocial behaviour, (4) inadequate caregiver supervision and risk to self and others, (5) risk to self but not others, and (6) mental health needs but low risk.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>These findings provide fresh insights into adverse experiences and risks identified by CAMHS. For professionals, the profiles identified in this study might provide insights into profiles of identified risks, in contrast to traditional cumulative approaches to risk. For researchers, these profiles may be fertile ground for hypothesis-driven work on the association between adversity and later outcomes.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":73542,"journal":{"name":"JCPP advances","volume":"4 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/jcv2.12246","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Risk rates and profiles at intake in child and adolescent mental health services: A cohort and latent class analyses of 21,688 young people in South London\",\"authors\":\"Barry Coughlan,&nbsp;Matt Woolgar,&nbsp;Rick Hood,&nbsp;Dustin Hutchinson,&nbsp;Ella Denford,&nbsp;Amy Hillier,&nbsp;Keith Clements,&nbsp;Teresa Geraghty,&nbsp;Ava Berry,&nbsp;Paul Bywaters,&nbsp;Andy Bilson,&nbsp;Jack Smith,&nbsp;Taliah Drayak,&nbsp;David Graham,&nbsp;Francesca Crozier-Roche,&nbsp;Robbie Duschinsky\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/jcv2.12246\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Background</h3>\\n \\n <p>Children and young people (CYP) seen by child and adolescent mental health services (CAMHS) often experience safeguarding issues. Yet little is known about the volume and nature of these risks, including how different adversities or risks relate to one another. This exploratory study aims to bridge this gap, examining rates at entry to services and profiles of risk using a latent class analysis.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Methods</h3>\\n \\n <p>Data were extracted for CYP who received at least one risk assessment at CAMHs in South London between January 2007 and December 2017. In total, there were 21,688 risk assessments. Latent class analysis was used to identify profiles of risk from the risk assessments.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Results</h3>\\n \\n <p>Concerns about parent mental health (<i>n</i> = 5274; 24%), emotional abuse (<i>n</i> = 4487; 21%), violence towards others (<i>n</i> = 4210; 19%), destructive behaviour (<i>n</i> = 4005; 18%), and not attending school (<i>n</i> = 3762; 17%) were the most commonly identified risks. Six distinct profiles of risk were identified from the latent class analyses: (1) maltreatment and externalising behaviours, (2) maltreatment but low risk to self and others, (3) antisocial behaviour, (4) inadequate caregiver supervision and risk to self and others, (5) risk to self but not others, and (6) mental health needs but low risk.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\\n \\n <p>These findings provide fresh insights into adverse experiences and risks identified by CAMHS. For professionals, the profiles identified in this study might provide insights into profiles of identified risks, in contrast to traditional cumulative approaches to risk. For researchers, these profiles may be fertile ground for hypothesis-driven work on the association between adversity and later outcomes.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":73542,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"JCPP advances\",\"volume\":\"4 3\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/jcv2.12246\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"JCPP advances\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jcv2.12246\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JCPP advances","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jcv2.12246","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

儿童和青少年心理健康服务机构(CAMHS)接诊的儿童和青少年(CYP)经常会遇到安全保护问题。然而,人们对这些风险的数量和性质知之甚少,包括不同的逆境或风险之间的关系。这项探索性研究旨在弥合这一差距,采用潜类分析法研究进入服务机构的比率和风险概况。研究人员提取了 2007 年 1 月至 2017 年 12 月间在伦敦南部儿童青少年心理健康中心接受过至少一次风险评估的儿童青少年的数据。总共进行了 21,688 次风险评估。对父母心理健康的担忧(n = 5274;24%)、情感虐待(n = 4487;21%)、对他人的暴力行为(n = 4210;19%)、破坏行为(n = 4005;18%)和不上学(n = 3762;17%)是最常见的风险。通过潜类分析发现了六种不同的风险特征:(1)虐待和外化行为;(2)虐待但对自己和他人的风险较低;(3)反社会行为;(4)照料者监管不足且对自己和他人构成风险;(5)对自己构成风险但对他人无风险;(6)有心理健康需求但风险较低。对于专业人员来说,与传统的风险累积法相比,本研究中发现的风险特征可能会让他们对已识别风险的特征有更深入的了解。对于研究人员来说,这些特征可能是研究逆境与日后结果之间关联的假设驱动型工作的沃土。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Risk rates and profiles at intake in child and adolescent mental health services: A cohort and latent class analyses of 21,688 young people in South London

Background

Children and young people (CYP) seen by child and adolescent mental health services (CAMHS) often experience safeguarding issues. Yet little is known about the volume and nature of these risks, including how different adversities or risks relate to one another. This exploratory study aims to bridge this gap, examining rates at entry to services and profiles of risk using a latent class analysis.

Methods

Data were extracted for CYP who received at least one risk assessment at CAMHs in South London between January 2007 and December 2017. In total, there were 21,688 risk assessments. Latent class analysis was used to identify profiles of risk from the risk assessments.

Results

Concerns about parent mental health (n = 5274; 24%), emotional abuse (n = 4487; 21%), violence towards others (n = 4210; 19%), destructive behaviour (n = 4005; 18%), and not attending school (n = 3762; 17%) were the most commonly identified risks. Six distinct profiles of risk were identified from the latent class analyses: (1) maltreatment and externalising behaviours, (2) maltreatment but low risk to self and others, (3) antisocial behaviour, (4) inadequate caregiver supervision and risk to self and others, (5) risk to self but not others, and (6) mental health needs but low risk.

Conclusions

These findings provide fresh insights into adverse experiences and risks identified by CAMHS. For professionals, the profiles identified in this study might provide insights into profiles of identified risks, in contrast to traditional cumulative approaches to risk. For researchers, these profiles may be fertile ground for hypothesis-driven work on the association between adversity and later outcomes.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
13 weeks
期刊最新文献
Issue Information Implementing open science and reproducible research practices in mental health research through registered reports Special educational needs provision and academic outcomes for children with teacher reported language difficulties at school entry Examining the association of neighborhood conditions on attention‐deficit/hyperactivity disorder symptoms in autistic youth using the child opportunity index 2.0 The trajectory of anxiety symptoms during the transition from childhood to young adulthood is predicted by IQ and sex, but not polygenic risk scores
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1