Children’s experiences of Signs of Safety: A scoping review

IF 2.4 2区 社会学 Q1 FAMILY STUDIES
Louise Caffrey , Eavan Brady , Orla Keegan , Siobhán Dunne , Greg Sheaf , Stephanie Holt , Robbie Gilligan
{"title":"Children’s experiences of Signs of Safety: A scoping review","authors":"Louise Caffrey ,&nbsp;Eavan Brady ,&nbsp;Orla Keegan ,&nbsp;Siobhán Dunne ,&nbsp;Greg Sheaf ,&nbsp;Stephanie Holt ,&nbsp;Robbie Gilligan","doi":"10.1016/j.childyouth.2024.107973","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background and Objectives</h3><div>It is increasingly recognised that children’s perceptions and experiences should be sought and heard in service design and delivery. Signs of Safety (SofS) is a popular framework for child protection social work used in over 200 agencies globally. This scoping review aims to identify and synthesise the existing literature concerning children’s self-reported experiences of SofS.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Following a five-stage scoping review approach, a search of 26 databases and other electronic sources was undertaken. In addition, 23 SofS experts contributed to a consultation to identify further relevant material. Data synthesis included a structured two-author data extraction process and thematic analysis of qualitative data.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Of the initial 981 sources identified, eight publications from seven studies met the search criteria and were included in the final review. Overall, the review demonstrates a limited evidence base. Studies are across six countries, but our search identified only one large scale study, with other sources comprising six or fewer participants. A key finding across this literature is that children report that SofS tools and processes can provide opportunities to support their participation in the child protection process. However, experiences are not universally positive and are influenced by how tools and processes are used.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>While the evidence base is growing, there remains a need for high quality research on children’s self-reported experiences of SofS that includes children from the age of at least six years. The review highlights the importance of ensuring that workers are supported to develop the necessarily skills and experience <em>and</em> have organisational support to use SofS tools and processes effectively when engaging with children.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48428,"journal":{"name":"Children and Youth Services Review","volume":"166 ","pages":"Article 107973"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Children and Youth Services Review","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0190740924005450","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"FAMILY STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background and Objectives

It is increasingly recognised that children’s perceptions and experiences should be sought and heard in service design and delivery. Signs of Safety (SofS) is a popular framework for child protection social work used in over 200 agencies globally. This scoping review aims to identify and synthesise the existing literature concerning children’s self-reported experiences of SofS.

Methods

Following a five-stage scoping review approach, a search of 26 databases and other electronic sources was undertaken. In addition, 23 SofS experts contributed to a consultation to identify further relevant material. Data synthesis included a structured two-author data extraction process and thematic analysis of qualitative data.

Results

Of the initial 981 sources identified, eight publications from seven studies met the search criteria and were included in the final review. Overall, the review demonstrates a limited evidence base. Studies are across six countries, but our search identified only one large scale study, with other sources comprising six or fewer participants. A key finding across this literature is that children report that SofS tools and processes can provide opportunities to support their participation in the child protection process. However, experiences are not universally positive and are influenced by how tools and processes are used.

Conclusions

While the evidence base is growing, there remains a need for high quality research on children’s self-reported experiences of SofS that includes children from the age of at least six years. The review highlights the importance of ensuring that workers are supported to develop the necessarily skills and experience and have organisational support to use SofS tools and processes effectively when engaging with children.
儿童对安全标识的体验:范围界定审查
背景和目标 人们越来越认识到,在服务设计和提供过程中,应征求和听取儿童的看法和经验。安全征兆(SofS)是全球 200 多个机构使用的儿童保护社会工作流行框架。本范围界定综述旨在确定和综合有关儿童自我报告的 SofS 体验的现有文献。方法按照五阶段范围界定综述方法,对 26 个数据库和其他电子来源进行了检索。此外,23 位 SofS 专家参与了咨询,以确定更多相关资料。在最初确定的 981 个资料来源中,有 7 项研究的 8 篇出版物符合检索标准,并被纳入最终综述。总体而言,综述显示证据基础有限。研究遍及六个国家,但我们的搜索只发现了一项大规模研究,其他资料的参与者只有六人或更少。这些文献的一个重要发现是,儿童报告说,SofS 工具和流程可以提供机会,支持他们参与儿童保护过程。结论虽然证据基础在不断扩大,但仍然需要对儿童自我报告的 SofS 体验进行高质量的研究,研究对象至少包括六岁以上的儿童。审查强调,必须确保工作人员在与儿童接触时,能够得到支持,以发展必要的技能和经验,并得到组织支持,从而有效使用 SofS 工具和流程。
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
6.30
自引率
6.10%
发文量
303
期刊介绍: Children and Youth Services Review is an interdisciplinary forum for critical scholarship regarding service programs for children and youth. The journal will publish full-length articles, current research and policy notes, and book reviews.
×
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