Research Reactivity and Distress Protocols for Youth Trauma-related Research: A Scoping Review

Angela Wei, Marria Khalid, Erik Ge, Jiyeon Kang, Makaśa Looking Horse, C. Wekerle
{"title":"Research Reactivity and Distress Protocols for Youth Trauma-related Research: A Scoping Review","authors":"Angela Wei, Marria Khalid, Erik Ge, Jiyeon Kang, Makaśa Looking Horse, C. Wekerle","doi":"10.54488/ijcar.2022.297","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective: To explore literature regarding youth with Adverse childhood experiences (ACEs), their potential reactivity to research, and research trauma mitigation protocols. \nMethods: A systematic scoping review was conducted in APA PsychInfo, CINAHL, Embase, and OVID Medline. 2 reviewers screened each article for 12 eligible studies. Quantitative and qualitative studies measuring maltreatment and trauma research responses were eligible. Youth were defined as individuals aged 10-19. \nResults: No study utilized the ACEs questionnaire with research-related stress measures. Among those that included research reactivity measures, various forms of childhood and youth victimization were considered. The majority of participants did not report feeling upset, with many reporting benefits to participation. Information on protocols for managing distress was available for 11 studies, the most common being the provision of a resource helpsheet and/or referral system.  \nImplications: There is no indication of distress following ACEs-related research, with few studies measuring across the research experience. One study measured follow-up for distress and further action. Additional research may be indicated to assess the effectiveness of these protocols in this population with a follow-up assessment.","PeriodicalId":91281,"journal":{"name":"International journal of child and adolescent resilience","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International journal of child and adolescent resilience","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.54488/ijcar.2022.297","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To explore literature regarding youth with Adverse childhood experiences (ACEs), their potential reactivity to research, and research trauma mitigation protocols. Methods: A systematic scoping review was conducted in APA PsychInfo, CINAHL, Embase, and OVID Medline. 2 reviewers screened each article for 12 eligible studies. Quantitative and qualitative studies measuring maltreatment and trauma research responses were eligible. Youth were defined as individuals aged 10-19. Results: No study utilized the ACEs questionnaire with research-related stress measures. Among those that included research reactivity measures, various forms of childhood and youth victimization were considered. The majority of participants did not report feeling upset, with many reporting benefits to participation. Information on protocols for managing distress was available for 11 studies, the most common being the provision of a resource helpsheet and/or referral system.  Implications: There is no indication of distress following ACEs-related research, with few studies measuring across the research experience. One study measured follow-up for distress and further action. Additional research may be indicated to assess the effectiveness of these protocols in this population with a follow-up assessment.
青少年创伤相关研究的研究反应性和痛苦协议:范围综述
目的:探讨青少年不良童年经历(ace)、其对研究的潜在反应以及研究创伤缓解方案的相关文献。方法:在APA PsychInfo、CINAHL、Embase和OVID Medline上进行系统的范围综述,2名审稿人从12项符合条件的研究中筛选每篇文章。测量虐待和创伤研究反应的定量和定性研究是合格的。青年被定义为10-19岁的个体。结果:没有研究将ace问卷与研究相关压力测量相结合。在包括研究反应性措施的措施中,审议了各种形式的儿童和青年受害情况。大多数参与者并没有感到沮丧,许多人报告说参与有好处。有11项研究提供了关于处理痛苦的协议的信息,最常见的是提供资源帮助表和/或转诊系统。含义:在ace相关的研究中没有出现痛苦的迹象,很少有研究测量整个研究经验。一项研究测量了抑郁的随访和进一步的行动。可能需要进一步的研究来评估这些方案在该人群中的有效性,并进行随访评估。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书