Is there consensus on child violence exposure measures? A study of six recommended instruments

Background: International research has established that children and adolescents are at high risk for being exposed to violence. A systematic review published in 2023 recommended six child and adolescent self-report violence against children (VAC) measures, based on their psychometric properties, in a systematic COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) review. However, the degree of overlap and heterogeneity was not part of the analysis.Objective: To compare the six measures with respect to item overlap and differences concerning specification of exposure dimensions.Method: A content analysis of the original 174 items resulted in a reduction to 38 unique items. These items were organized visually in a co-occurrence circle using an adapted version of Fried's R code. Furthermore, a pairwise comparison of event lists was performed using the Jaccard index.Results: There was a modest overlap among the six measures. Only one item was present in all six measures, only two items were present in four measures, and 78% of the items were present in just one or two measures. The overall overlap between the six measures was 25%.Conclusions: The lack of overlap among measures reflects a heterogeneity of definitions and purposes. It also impedes progress in research, as comparisons between various studies are difficult to make in a valid and reliable way. The lack of consensus also delays efficient political initiatives, because solid, consensual knowledge about the prevalence of VAC does not exist. Violence against children (VAC) is a high political and professional priority. A recent systematic review recommended six self-report measures based on their psychometric qualities.The VAC items were very diverse. A content analysis reduced the original 174 items to 38 unique items. A Jaccard index showed an overlap of 25%.The lack of consensus in definitions and applied measures impedes progress in research and delays important political, prophylactic initiatives. Antecedentes: La investigaci & oacute;n internacional ha establecido que los ni & ntilde;os y adolescentes corren un alto riesgo de estar expuestos a la violencia contra los ni & ntilde;os (VAC en su sigla en ingl & eacute;s). Recientemente, en una revisi & oacute;n sistem & aacute;tica COSMIN (COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments [Est & aacute;ndares basados en consenso para la selecci & oacute;n de instrumentos de medida en salud]), se recomendaron seis medidas de exposici & oacute;n a la violencia hacia ni & ntilde;os y adolescentes basadas en sus propiedades psicom & eacute;tricas. No obstante, el grado de solapamiento y heterogeneidad no form & oacute; parte del an & aacute;lisis.Objetivo: Comparar las seis medidas con respecto al solapamiento de los & iacute;tems y las diferencias relativas a la especificaci & oacute;n de las dimensiones de exposici & oacute;n.M & eacute;todo: Un an & aacute;lisis de contenido de los 174 & iacute;tems originales dio como resultado una reducci & oacute;n a 38 & iacute;tems & uacute;nicos. Estos & iacute;tems se organizaron visualmente en un c & iacute;rculo de co-ocurrencia utilizando una versi & oacute;n adaptada del c & oacute;digo R de Fried. Adem & aacute;s, se realiz & oacute; una comparaci & oacute;n por pares de las listas de eventos mediante el & iacute;ndice de Jaccard.Resultados: Hubo un modesto solapamiento entre las seis medidas. S & oacute;lo un & iacute;tem estaba presente en las seis medidas; s & oacute;lo dos & iacute;tems estaban presentes en cuatro medidas; el 78% de los & iacute;tems estaban presentes en s & oacute;lo una o dos medidas. El solapamiento global entre las seis medidas fue del 25%.Conclusiones: La falta de solapamiento entre las medidas refleja una heterogeneidad de definiciones y prop & oacute;sitos. Esto tambi & eacute;n obstaculiza el progreso de la investigaci & oacute;n, ya que resulta dif & iacute;cil realizar comparaciones entre diversos estudios de forma v & aacute;lida y confiable. La falta de consenso tambi & eacute;n retrasa la adopci & oacute;n de iniciativas pol & iacute;ticas eficaces, ya que no existe un conocimiento s & oacute;lido y consensuado sobre la prevalencia.