Cited by 92

Children in the Public Benefit System at Risk of Maltreatment

Vaithianathan, Rhema, Maloney, Tim, Putnam-Hornstein, Emily, Jiang, Nan·2013·American Journal of Preventive Medicine

Abstract

A growing body of research links child abuse and neglect to a range of negative short- and long-term health outcomes. Determining a child's risk of maltreatment at or shortly after birth provides an opportunity for the delivery of targeted prevention services. This study presents findings from a predictive risk model (PRM) developed to estimate the likelihood of substantiated maltreatment among children enrolled in New Zealand's public benefit system. The objective was to explore the potential use of administrative data for targeting prevention and early intervention services to children and families. A data set of integrated public benefit and child protection records for children born in New Zealand between January 1, 2003, and June 1, 2006, was used to develop a risk algorithm using stepwise probit modeling. Data were analyzed in 2012. The final model included 132 variables and produced an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 76%. Among children in the top decile of risk, 47.8% had been substantiated for maltreatment by age 5 years. Of all children substantiated for maltreatment by age 5 years, 83% had been enrolled in the public benefit system before age 2 years. This analysis demonstrates that PRMs can be used to generate risk scores for substantiated maltreatment. Although a PRM cannot replace more-comprehensive clinical assessments of abuse and neglect risk, this approach provides a simple and cost-effective method of targeting early prevention ser…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.amepre.2013.04.022

Cites

6 of 6 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • In child welfare, algorithmic risk assessment tools are being adopted to assist caseworkers in screening decisions that determine whether a family is investigated for alleged maltreatment.

    “In child welfare, for example, algorithmic risk assessment tools are being adopted to assist caseworkers in screening decisions that determine whether a family is investigated for alleged maltreatment (Chouldechova et al. 2018;Vaithianathan et al. 2013).”

    From Limits of Interventions in AI-Assisted Decision Making (2026) · cites this paper as Vaithianathan et al. 2013

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Vaithianathan, R., Maloney, T., Putnam-Hornstein, E., & Jiang, N.
Venue
American Journal of Preventive Medicine
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2013-09
Volume
45
Issue
3
Pages
354-359
ISSN
0749-3797
Cited by
92
References
6
Language
en

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review