TY - BOOK
T1 - Rapid Evidence Assessment
T2 - Quantifying Online Facilitated Child Sexual Abuse: Report for the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse
AU - Wager, Nadia
AU - Gallagher, Bernard
AU - Armitage, Rachel
AU - Rogerson, Michelle
AU - Christmann, Kris
AU - Parkinson, Simon
AU - Reeves, Carla
AU - Ioannou, Maria
AU - Synnott, John
PY - 2018/1/22
Y1 - 2018/1/22
N2 - This document supplementsthe main report for the rapid evidence assessment (REA) Quantifying Online-Facilitated Child Sexual Abuse. Appendices 1–5 providedetails of thebibliographic databases,data search strategies and data extraction toolsused when undertaking the REA. Appendices 6–12 provide asynopsis and critical appraisal of each study includedin the REA, describingthe scientific rigour of the studiesand looking at their strengths andlimitationswhen quantifyingthe scale of online-facilitated child sexual abuse (CSA). Each study iscolour-codedaccording to a system used in the key tables introducingthe studies in the main report: ‘red’, ‘amber’ and ‘green’. Green is used forsources or studies that have the fewestmethodological weaknesses, amber forthose that have some methodological weaknesses but still have potential to inform estimations, and red forthose that have significant methodological weaknesses.
AB - This document supplementsthe main report for the rapid evidence assessment (REA) Quantifying Online-Facilitated Child Sexual Abuse. Appendices 1–5 providedetails of thebibliographic databases,data search strategies and data extraction toolsused when undertaking the REA. Appendices 6–12 provide asynopsis and critical appraisal of each study includedin the REA, describingthe scientific rigour of the studiesand looking at their strengths andlimitationswhen quantifyingthe scale of online-facilitated child sexual abuse (CSA). Each study iscolour-codedaccording to a system used in the key tables introducingthe studies in the main report: ‘red’, ‘amber’ and ‘green’. Green is used forsources or studies that have the fewestmethodological weaknesses, amber forthose that have some methodological weaknesses but still have potential to inform estimations, and red forthose that have significant methodological weaknesses.
UR - https://pure.hud.ac.uk/en/publications/4131d561-7c79-42eb-9c3a-e34e3270535f
M3 - Commissioned report
BT - Rapid Evidence Assessment
PB - Home Office
ER -