Search

There is a growing interest in English-speaking jurisdictions, including Australia, North America, Canada, the United Kingdom and New Zealand, about the prevention of sexual abuse perpetrated by children against other children. The aim of this review was to identify opportunities for research, policy and practice which could enhance the prevention agenda relating to the perpetration of sexual abuse by children through conducting a Critical Interpretive Synthesis. Eleven electronic databases were searched in the period from 22 April to 23 May 2013 and included: SocINDEX, Social Services Abstracts, Applied Social Sciences Index and Abstracts, Family and Society Studies Worldwide, Project Muse, PsychINFO, Family and Society Plus, Jstor, Expanded Academic ASAP, Web of Science and Google Scholar. Key individual journals were also searched, including Child Abuse and Neglect and the Journal of Interpersonal Violence, as well as the grey literature. The search was guided by the research question: How could the prevention agenda relating to sexual abuse perpetrated by children be enhanced? The systematic literature search yielded 3323 titles, and 34 of these papers were included in the final synthesis. The authors identified five domains operating in the evidence base: characteristics, causes, communications, interventions and treatments. A synthesising construct emerged from the review: prevention-enhancing interactions. This construct referred to the potential for enhancing the prevention agenda which exists as the evidence domains interact with one another, and with the public health model of prevention. The authors consider this review to be a timely contribution to the current agenda pertaining to sexual abuse perpetrated by children. It provides researchers, policy makers and practitioners in the field with an evidence-informed conceptualisation of opportunities for enhancing prevention work. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Internationally, the COVID-19 pandemic resulted in changes to services as governments funneled health-related funding and resources into stopping the spread of COVID-19. At the same time, older people were singled out as an "at-risk" group, which prompted caution from both older people and governments to limit their exposure to COVID-19. It remains unclear what the impact this has had on older people's routine health and social care access, and how older people themselves viewed these changes. This analysis investigates older people's understanding and experiences of using health and social care services under the COVID-19 lockdown restrictions in 2020. This analysis draws from a wider, letter-writing study that received 748 letters from 854 participants aged 70 years and older who were living in New Zealand during the COVID-19 lockdowns. Just over half of letter writers described access to health and social care services. Informed by Penchansky and Thomas' 5 A's of the access framework, we conducted a thematic analysis of this subsample of letters (n = 404). This analysis identified four broad categories relating to access to health and social care services under COVID-19 lockdown restrictions: (a) the system-wide strangeness of physically accessing services, (b) accommodation of services, (c) availability of resources and personnel, and (d) enhanced quality of those included by services. Rather than passively accepting changes, older people adapted to restrictions by drawing on their available materials and social resources. We conclude this analysis with suggestions for improving future interventions and policies to better older people's access to health and social care during times of crisis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: To explore the views and opinions of nonconsumer researchers to the concept of an Expert Consumer Researcher Group. Design and Methods: Qualitative exploratory involving individual interviews with nonconsumer mental health researchers experienced in working collaboratively with consumer researchers. Data were analyzed thematically. Findings: Participants viewed the concept positively, albeit with caution. Perceived advantages included: greater visibility and enhanced access; collegiality; sharing and creating expertise; broader acceptance; making it mandatory; and structure and location. Participants were concerned about potential tokenism and implementation barriers. Practice Implications: Consumer involvement enhances the quality and relevance of research, potentially impacting clinical practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]