The medical evaluation is an important part of the clinical and legal process when child sexual abuse is suspected. Practitioners who examine children need to be up to date on current recommendations regarding when, how, and by whom these evaluations should be conducted, as well as how the medical findings should be interpreted. A previously published article on guidelines for medical care for sexually abused children has been widely used by physicians, nurses, and nurse practitioners to inform practice guidelines in this field. Since 2007, when the article was published, new research has suggested changes in some of the guidelines and in the table that lists medical and laboratory findings in children evaluated for suspected sexual abuse and suggests how these findings should be interpreted with respect to sexual abuse. A group of specialists in child abuse pediatrics met in person and via online communication from 2011 through 2014 to review published research as well as recommendations from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the American Academy of Pediatrics and to reach consensus on if and how the guidelines and approach to interpretation table should be updated. The revisions are based, when possible, on data from well-designed, unbiased studies published in high-ranking, peer-reviewed, scientific journals that were reviewed and vetted by the authors. When such studies were not available, recommendations were based on expert consensus.
WHAT'S KNOWN ON THIS SUBJECT: Pediatric Brain Injury Research Network investigators recently derived a highly sensitive clinical prediction rule for pediatric abusive head trauma (AHT). WHAT THIS STUDY ADDS:The performance of this AHT screening tool has been validated. Four clinical variables, readily available at the time of admission, detect pediatric AHT with high sensitivity in intensive care settings. abstract BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: To reduce missed cases of pediatric abusive head trauma (AHT), Pediatric Brain Injury Research Network investigators derived a 4-variable AHT clinical prediction rule (CPR) with sensitivity of .96. Our objective was to validate the screening performance of this AHT CPR in a new, equivalent patient population. METHODS:We conducted a prospective, multicenter, observational, cross-sectional study. Applying the same inclusion criteria, definitional criteria for AHT, and methods used in the completed derivation study, Pediatric Brain Injury Research Network investigators captured complete clinical, historical, and radiologic data on 291 acutely headinjured children ,3 years of age admitted to PICUs at 14 participating sites, sorted them into comparison groups of abusive and nonabusive head trauma, and measured the screening performance of the AHT CPR. RESULTS:In this new patient population, the 4-variable AHT CPR demonstrated sensitivity of .96, specificity of .46, positive predictive value of .55, negative predictive value of .93, positive likelihood ratio of 1.67, and negative likelihood ratio of 0.09. Secondary analysis revealed that the AHT CPR identified 98% of study patients who were ultimately diagnosed with AHT.CONCLUSIONS: Four readily available variables (acute respiratory compromise before admission; bruising of the torso, ears, or neck; bilateral or interhemispheric subdural hemorrhages or collections; and any skull fractures other than an isolated, unilateral, nondiastatic, linear, parietal fracture) identify AHT with high sensitivity in young, acutely head-injured children admitted to the PICU. Pediatrics 2014;134:e1537-e1544
Significant race/ethnicity-based disparities in AHT evaluation and reporting were observed at only 2 of 18 sites and occurred almost exclusively in lower risk patients. In the absence of local confounders, these disparities likely represent the impact of local physicians' implicit bias.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2025 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.