Development and content validation of a comprehensive tool for assessing risk and protective factors in children and adolescents: The ACRAM

Structural Validity and Internal Consistency of the Adolescents and Children Risk of Abuse and Maltreatment Parental Scale (ACRAM-PS)

“…CFA were tested for each factor, except for factors 4 (Neglect of educational needs) and 13 (Labor exploitation and begging), since they were composed of only two items and a model cannot be identified with less than three indicators. All tested models were based on the previously established structure proposed by experts on the content validity phase (Navarro-Pérez et al, 2023).…”

“…The ACRAM went through several stages of content validation described in Navarro-Pérez et al (2023), in which the initial content of items and theoretical structure was established based on a number of interviews, focus groups, and groups of experts in which both quantitative and qualitative information was collected. Once content validity and the final theoretical structure of the instrument was established, the instrument was tested on real children and adolescents assessed by social services professionals from the family, childhood, and adolescence area, who completed demographic information on the ACRAM and the Childhood Trauma Questionnaire Short Form (CTQ-SF) (Bernstein et al, 2003), for later convergent validation.…”

Development and Validation of the Adolescent and Children in Risk of Abuse and Maltreatment Protective Factors Scale (ACRAM-PFS)

“…According to Frazier ( 2018 ) or Kim et al ( 2022 ) these instruments can be subjective in assessing one’s own abilities, especially in children and adolescents who have experienced adversity and may have an altered self-concept. The relevance of protective factors in relation to prevention and evaluation of intervention programs generates the need to create specific scales with good psychometric properties designed to be filled out externally by qualified professionals (Counts et al, 2010 ; Navarro-Pérez et al 2022a ). In addition, Dimitrova and Wiium ( 2021 ) recently promoted the development of instruments within the framework of public policies that are accompanied by qualitative sections to develop lines of intervention based on the strengths of the child, their family or the natural environment in which they socialise and that promote resilient actions.…”

“…Recent studies highlighted the role of socioecological models with the aim to gather as much information as possible from the complex situations where child maltreatment occurs (Austin et al, 2020 ). Despite the reduced number of comprehensive measures created to assess the totality of protective factors (Navarro-Pérez et al 2022a ; Sprague-Jones, 2019 ), most of them are designed specifically to assess one of the multiple dimensions of protective factors like, for example, child or family traits (Counts et al, 2010 ; García-Grau et al, 2018 ), resilience (Daigneault et al, 2013 ; Llistosella et al, 2019 ), or school engagement (Cage et al, 2019 ). As defined by Clauss-Ehlers ( 2008 ), the development of resilience is influenced by contextual factors, and not only characterized by children intrinsical traits.…”

“…There is a lack of studies in the literature dealing with measuring or assessing protective factors of child maltreatment. Additionally, the general lack of psychometric evidence in the scales measuring different dimensions of protection from child maltreatment, gives rise to the need to develop a protective factors inventory for the adequate identification of these variables (Navarro-Pérez et al 2022a ; Meng et al, 2018 ), and offer evidence on its psychometric behavior. In order to address this last objective, we examined the structural validity and internal consistency of this new scale called Adolescent and Children Risk of Abuse and Maltreatment Protective Factors Scale (ACRAM-PFS), developed on the basis of the socio-ecological model proposed by Belsky ( 1980 , 1993 ).…”