Back to Annual Meeting

Back to Annual Meeting

APHA Scientific Session and Event Listing

Recorded presentation

Patricia Schnitzer, PhD, School of Nursing, University of Missouri - Columbia, S331, School of Nursing, Columbia, MO 65211, 573-882-1969, schnitzerp@health.missouri.edu, Theresa Covington, MPH, Michigan Public Health Institute, 2438 Woodlake Circle, Suite 240, Okemos, MI 48864, Stephen Wirtz, PhD, Epidemiology and Prevention for Injury Control (EPIC) Branch, California Department of Health Services, MS 7214, P.O. Box 997413, Sacramento, CA 95899-7413, Wedny Verhoek-Oftedahl, PhD, Brown University, department of Community Health, Providence, RI 02115, and Vincent Palusci, MD, MS, School of Medicine, Wayne State University, 3901 Beaubien Blvd, Suite 1K40, Detroit, MI 48201.

Objectives: Describe three approaches taken to develop public health surveillance of fatal child maltreatment (CM), summarize the epidemiology of CM, and assess the utility of each data source. Method: California (CA), Michigan (MI), and Rhode Island (RI), used four common existing data sources for surveillance case ascertainment. Surveillance was conducted for 2 years in CA and MI, and 5 years in RI. Descriptive analyses were conducted and fatal child maltreatment rates were calculated. Results: There were 258 cases ascertained in CA, 192 in MI and 60 in RI. CM fatality rates per 100,000 were 2.5, 6.8, and 8.8 in CA, MI, and RI, respectively. Of the CM-related deaths ascertained by each of the four data sources, most deaths were identified by Child Death Review Teams in Rhode Island (98%), Uniform Crime Reports in California (56%) and Child Welfare in Michigan (44%). Sources identifying the fewest CM-related deaths were death certificates in CA and RI, and Uniform Crime Reports in RI and MI). In all three states, over 90% of the total cases ascertained could be identified by combining just two data sources, although the two key sources differed by state. Conclusion: Developing public health surveillance for fatal child maltreatment using multiple data sources for case ascertainment in three US states demonstrated consistent under ascertainment in all sources. However, as few as two data sources used in combination substantially increases case ascertainment and is probably sufficient for surveillance.

Learning Objectives: At the conclusion of this session, the participant will be able to

• Discuss different approaches to public health surveillance of fatal child maltreatment.
• Identify potential secondary data sources for child maltreatment surveillance.
• Describe options for developing comprehensive surveillance for fatal child maltreatment.

Keywords: Children, Death

Presenting author's disclosure statement:

Any relevant financial relationships? No

Recorded presentation