Developing a model for providing feedback to reporters of elder abuse.

IF 1.6 2区 心理学 Q3 GERONTOLOGY
Journal of Elder Abuse & Neglect Pub Date : 2024-11-01 Epub Date: 2024-06-03 DOI:10.1080/08946566.2024.2361633
Kristin Lees Haggerty, Olanike Ojelabi, Randi Campetti, Athi Myint-U, Kathy Greenlee
{"title":"Developing a model for providing feedback to reporters of elder abuse.","authors":"Kristin Lees Haggerty, Olanike Ojelabi, Randi Campetti, Athi Myint-U, Kathy Greenlee","doi":"10.1080/08946566.2024.2361633","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Lack of feedback about reports made to Adult Protective Services (APS) is an important barrier to elder mistreatment reporting. To better understand barriers and facilitators to APS-reporter communication, we conducted an environmental scan of state policies and practices. We gathered publicly available information from 52 states and territories on APS administrative structure, reporting, intake, investigation, and feedback processes; performed a secondary analysis of focus groups with Emergency Medical Services providers and APS staff; and interviewed 44 APS leaders in 24 states/territories. Results revealed variation in information-sharing with reporters. Qualitative analyses revealed three overarching themes related to whether, when, and how information is shared. Results were used to develop a model illustrating factors influencing APS decisions on sharing information. This model incorporates the type of reporter (professional or nonprofessional), their relationship with the APS client (brief or ongoing), and the potential risks and benefits of sharing information with the reporter.</p>","PeriodicalId":46983,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Elder Abuse & Neglect","volume":" ","pages":"439-457"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11563901/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Elder Abuse & Neglect","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/08946566.2024.2361633","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/6/3 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"GERONTOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Lack of feedback about reports made to Adult Protective Services (APS) is an important barrier to elder mistreatment reporting. To better understand barriers and facilitators to APS-reporter communication, we conducted an environmental scan of state policies and practices. We gathered publicly available information from 52 states and territories on APS administrative structure, reporting, intake, investigation, and feedback processes; performed a secondary analysis of focus groups with Emergency Medical Services providers and APS staff; and interviewed 44 APS leaders in 24 states/territories. Results revealed variation in information-sharing with reporters. Qualitative analyses revealed three overarching themes related to whether, when, and how information is shared. Results were used to develop a model illustrating factors influencing APS decisions on sharing information. This model incorporates the type of reporter (professional or nonprofessional), their relationship with the APS client (brief or ongoing), and the potential risks and benefits of sharing information with the reporter.

制定向虐待老人举报人提供反馈的模式。
对向成人保护服务机构(APS)报告的情况缺乏反馈是报告虐待老人行为的一个重要障碍。为了更好地了解 APS 与报告者沟通的障碍和促进因素,我们对各州的政策和实践进行了环境扫描。我们从 52 个州和地区收集了有关 APS 行政结构、报告、受理、调查和反馈流程的公开信息;对与紧急医疗服务提供者和 APS 工作人员组成的焦点小组进行了二次分析;并采访了 24 个州/地区的 44 名 APS 领导。结果显示,在与报告者共享信息方面存在差异。定性分析揭示了与是否共享信息、何时共享信息以及如何共享信息相关的三大主题。研究结果被用来建立一个模型,说明影响 APS 共享信息决策的因素。该模型包括报告人的类型(专业或非专业)、他们与 APS 客户的关系(短暂或持续),以及与报告人共享信息的潜在风险和好处。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
15.80%
发文量
17
期刊介绍: The Journal of Elder Abuse & Neglect is the peer-reviewed quarterly journal that explores the advances in research, policy and practice, and clinical and ethical issues surrounding the abuse and neglect of older people. This unique forum provides state-of-the-art research and practice that is both international and multidisciplinary in scope. The journal"s broad, comprehensive approach is only one of its strengths—it presents training issues, research findings, case studies, practice and policy issues, book and media reviews, commentary, and historical background on a wide range of topics. Readers get tools and techniques needed for better detecting and responding to actual or potential elder abuse and neglect.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信