Screening and Assessment Collection
Permanent URI for this collection
Browse
Browsing Screening and Assessment Collection by Issue Date
Now showing 1 - 20 of 45
Results Per Page
Sort Options
Item Index of Spouse Abuse(Journal of Marriage and the Family, 1978) McIntosh, S.R.; Hudson, W.W.McIntosh and Hudson developed the Index of Spouse Abuse (ISA) in 1978 as a short-form scale designed for medical professionals to either detect intimate partner violence or monitor and evaluate progress in abused women within clinical settings. ISA is a 30-item questionnaire intended to be self-administered by the patient. The questionnaire encourages patients to respond to its questions on a scale of one to five, where one is “Never” and five is “Very Frequently.” The ISA items ask patients about partner behaviors ranging from ‘demanding obedience,’ to ‘demanding sex,’ to ‘acts like he would like to kill me.’ ISA does maintain to measure magnitude of abuse; it is not just a tool to detect the presence or absence of abuse, but attempts to actually reveal its severity. This public domain tool is validated only for use with adult English-speaking women and is intended to detect male-on-female violence. (CVR Abstract)Item Adult Adolescent Parenting Inventory - Version 2(Family Development Resources, Inc., 1979) Bavolek, S.J.; Richard, K.G.Bavolek and Keene developed the Adult Adolescent Parenting Inventory (AAPI-2.1) in 2010 to assess the parenting and child rearing attitudes of adult and adolescent parent and pre-parent populations. The APPI-2.1 was updated from the original version of the APPI created in 1979. The APPI-2.1 is a 40-item self-reporting inventory that measures parental behaviors and is commonly used to assess the risk of child abuse and neglect. The AAPI-2.1 provides and index of five subscales: Expectations of Children, Parental Empathy towards Children's Needs, Use of Corporal Punishment, Parent-Child Family Roles, and Children's Power and Independence. The instrument is offered in English, Spanish, Creole, and Arabic, and takes 10-15 minutes to complete. There are two forms of the AAPI-2.1: Form A and Form B. Each form has 40 items presented on a five point Likert Scale of Strongly Agree, Agree, Disagree, Strongly Disagree and Uncertain. Traditionally, Form A is offered as a pretest and Form B as a posttest. Responses to the inventory provide an index of risk for practicing behaviors known to be attributable to child abuse and neglect. The APPI-2.1 was validated in 2006 by Nicola Conners, Leanne Whiteside-Mansell, David Deere, Toni Ledet, and Mark Edwards. Their findings suggested that the instrument was effective at measuring at least two of the constructs it purports to measure and that the total score may be useful. (CVR Abstract)Item Elder Assessment Instrument (EAI)(Journal of Gerontological Nursing, 1984) Fulmer, T.;Fulmer developed the Elder Assessment Instrument (EAI) in 1984 and updated it in 2003 to allow professionals “in all clinical settings” to screen for suspected elder abuse victims. EAI is designed for use only by clinicians screening their patients. The screening instrument is not a questionnaire with a scoring mechanism like many other tools, but rather a Likert scale and tracker for the clinician to rate whether there is no evidence, possible evidence, probably evidence, or definite evidence of elder abuse along five main categories of 41 health indicators. The instrument categories include a space for general assessment, “Possible Abuse Indicators,” “Possible Neglect Indicators,” “Possible Exploitation Indicators, and “Possible Abandonment Indicators” with room for an overall summary at the end. Fulmer directs clinicians using EAI to refer their patients to social services if there is any positive evidence of abuse (without clinical explanation) on any health indicator, or if the patient complains of mistreatment. There is no target population explicitly outlined in EAI. EAI is available for public use, but parties should contact The Journal of Gerontological Nursing if they are interested in reprinting this tool. (CVR Abstract)Item Child Abuse Potential Inventory(PAR, 1986) Milner, J.Milner developed the Child Abuse Potential Inventory (CAPI) in 1986 to help protective services workers detect physical child abuse in their investigations of reported child abuse cases. This is a self-report screening instrument given to parents or caregivers suspected of abuse. The test consists of 160-items and uses an “agree/disagree,” forced-choice format. CAPI contains a total of 10 standard scales and 2 specials scales (added to the measure in 1990). The 10 standard scales include a 77-item Child Abuse Scale and 3 validity scales. The primary clinical scale—Abuse Scale—can be divided into six factor scales: Distress; Rigidity; Unhappiness; Problems with Child and Self; Problems with Family; and Problems with Others. The two special scales are Loneliness and Ego-Strength, and the three validity scales are Lie, Random Response, and Inconsistency. There have been multiple studies that have shown that the parent or care-giver’s score on the CAP inventory is predictive of the child’s long-term intelligence, socioemotional outcome, and development as well as future behavior by the parent or care-giver. In the preliminary validation study done by Milner in 1984, he found a significant relationship between CAPI abuse scores and subsequent abuse as well as between abuse scores and later neglect. (CVR Abstract)Item Hwalek-Sengstock Elder Abuse Screening Test (H-S/EAST)(Sage Publications, 1991) Neale, A.V.; Hwalek, M.A.; Scott, R.O.; Stahl, C.;Neale, Hwalek, Scott, and Stahl developed the Hwalek-Sengstock Elder Abuse Screening Test (H-S/EAST) in 1991 to assist service providers who are interested in identifying people at high risk of the need for protective services. H-S/EAST is designed for service providers to use by interviewing their clients and writing their answers in with the relevant question item. The tool consists of 15 direct questions that range in topic from whether the client experiences loneliness to whether they are forced into uncomfortable situations. The authors note that “A response of ‘no’ to items 1, 6, 12, and 14; a response of ‘someone else’ to item 4; and a response of ‘yes’ to all others is scored in the ‘abused’ direction.” This tool was validated for English-speaking populations of older adults. H-S/EAST is available for public use, but parties should contact Sage Publications if they are interested in reprinting this tool. (CVR Abstract)Item Abuse Assessment Screen (AAS)(Sage Publications, 1992) Soeken, K.L.; McFarlane, J.; Parker, B.; Lominack, M.C.Soeken, McFarlane, Parker, and Lominack developed the Abuse Assessment Screen (A.A.S.) in 1992 as a clinician-administered sexual and physical violence assessment tool for use in medical practice. A.A.S. includes five questions about the experience of abusive behavior, three of which encourage the respondent to identify who is committing/committed that abuse. In addition to these questions, A.A.S. includes a figure of the female body for respondents to ‘map’ injuries as they appeared on their bodies and score these injuries from one (threat of abuse) to six (wound from weapon). A.A.S. does not use inclusive language and is focused on male-on-female violence. A.A.S. is a public domain tool, and a 1998 validation study by the original authors of the tool found A.A.S. to be a reliable and valid instrument for screening abuse. (CVR Abstract)Item Victimization Assessment Tool(Journal of Advanced Nursing, 1994) Hoff, L.A.; Rosenbaum, L.Hoff and Rosenbaum developed the Victimization Assessment Tool in 1994 to assist nurses and other primary care providers with routine assessment for victimization in diverse health and mental health settings. The tool is made up of five items which screen for physical interpersonal violence, sexual violence, suicidal ideation, and risk of hurting others. The tool is designed for men and women within a primary care setting. In their original article, Rosenbaum and Hoff found preliminary validity and reliability. (CVR Abstract)Item Brief Abuse Screen for the Elderly (BASE)(National Institute for the Care of the Elderly, 1995) Reis, M.; Nahmiash, D.;Reis and Nahmiash developed the Brief Abuse Screen for the Elderly (BASE) as part of an intervention model to combat abuse and neglect of older adults in 1995. BASE is designed for home-care workers to screen for abuse in new clients. To use BASE, trained health service workers complete a five-item questionnaire that includes questions about whether the person in question is a caregiver or care-receiver, a scale indicator of the suspicion of abuse, and what an estimated timeline for abuse intervention may need to be. This tool is designed for use with all English-speaking health service clients 60 years or over who are either caregivers or care-receivers. This tool is proprietary and interested parties should request permission from the authors to use it. (CVR Abstract)Item Conflict tactics scales - Parent child(National Inst. of Mental Health (DHHS), 1995) Straus, M.A.; Hamby, S.L.; Finkelhor, D.; Moore, D.; Runyan, D.Straus, Hamby, Finkelhor, Moore, and Runyan developed the Parent-Child Conflict Tactics Scales (CTSPC) as a brief tool to improve the ability of the already existent Conflict Tactics Scales (CTS) to obtain data on physical and psychological child maltreatment. The CTSPC is a 35-item parent-report measure that provides information regarding the presence and severity of parenting behaviors associated with child maltreatment. The assessment takes 6-8 minutes to complete and consists of six scales: Nonviolent Discipline; Psychological Aggression; Physical Assault; Supplemental Questions on Discipline in the Previous Week; Neglect; and Sexual Abuse. The CTSPC modified the original CTS to revise the psychological aggression and physical assault scales, replace the reasoning scale with the nonviolent discipline scale, and add supplemental scales to measure neglect and sexual abuse, as well as supplemental questions on discipline methods used in the previous week. The CTSPC was validated in 2018 by Allison Cotter, Kaitlin Proctor and Elizabeth Brestan-Knight. Their study found that observed parent behaviors relate to parents’ reported use of psychological aggression, corporal punishment, and assault, and that the measure should be interpreted at the subscale level. (CVR Abstract)Item Caregiver Abuse Screen (CASE)(The Canadian Association of Gerontology, 1995) Reis, M.; Nahmiash, D.;Reis and Nahmiash developed the Caregiver Abuse Screen (CASE) in 1995 and validated it in 2010 to provide communities with a tool to screen for elder abuse through informal caregivers rather than having individuals rely on professional reporting. CASE is designed as a brief questionnaire that caregivers can complete themselves or other community members can administer to the caregiver in question. CASE includes eight yes-or-no questions, each asking “Do you…” with a space to insert the name of the older adult they care for. The questions center around asking the caregiver whether they have trouble managing the elder’s behavior and whether they are mistreating the elder in their lives. This screening tool is appropriate for use by English-speaking adult caregivers and their community members, and could also be adapted for use by medical professionals. CASE is available for public use, but parties should contact The Canadian Association of Gerontology if they are interested in reprinting this tool. (CVR Abstract)Item Spousal Assault Risk Assessment (SARA)(Law and Human Behavior, 1995) Kropp, P.R.; Hart, S.D.; Webster, C.D.; Eaves, D.Kropp, Hart, Webster, and Eaves developed the Spousal Assault Risk Assessment (SARA) in 1995 for law enforcement professionals to use as a risk assessment during case management processes. The assessment includes 20 items separated into “criminal history,” “psychosocial adjustment,” “spousal assault history,” “current/most recent offence,” “other considerations,” and, finally, “risk for spousal assault.” SARA does not rely on an additive scale, but rather encourages assessors to review their codebook, consider each item rating as an individual indicator, and make a holistic final judgement (score). The questions do use gender neutral language and could be adapted to any homo- or heterosexual relationship in question. SARA is validated, but proprietary to the British Columbia Institute on Family Violence, so interested parties should contact the Institute before implementing this tool in their professional capacities. Note: items in the assessment are in Table 1 (page 3 of the linked PDF), but scoring not available; contact (CVR Abstract)Item Women's Experience with Battering (WEB)(1995) Smith, P.H.; Earp, J.L.; DeVellis, R.Smith, Earp, and DeVellis developed WEB, or the Women’s Experiences with Battering Scale, in 1995 as an intimate partner violence assessment tool designed to actually measure the experiences of women, not the behaviors of their partners. WEB was designed as a public domain tool for use by any victim service provider or other client advocate. The assessment can be integrated into the beginning of any client intake process. WEB can be self-administered or practitioner-administered via interview. The assessment asks the respondent to rate her level of agreement or disagreement, on a scale of one to six, with 10 statements about how she feels in her relationship. This tool is presented here in both English and Spanish. WEB is validated only for heterosexual partners, and its evaluation studies have demonstrated its effectiveness in identifying IPV among Black and White women, but not among other racial or ethnic groups. (CVR Abstract)Item Vulnerability to Abuse Screening Scale (VASS)(The Gerontological Society of America, 1996) Schofield, M.J.; Mishra, G.D.;Schofield and Mishra developed the Vulnerability to Abuse Screening Scale (VASS) in 1996 and validated the screening tool in 2003. VASS is designed to help identify women above age 70 who may be at risk of elder abuse through a self-report instrument. VASS is intentionally designed as a self-reporting mechanism; the authors believe self-reporting provides more accurate information about the risk of elder abuse because it removes the shame feeling some adults experience as a barrier when speaking with medical providers. VASS consists of 12 yes-or-no straightforward questions that each focus on whether the respondent is afraid, experiencing harm, sad, or forced to do things they do not want to do. This screening tool is appropriate for English-speaking populations of adult women. VASS is available for public use, but parties should contact The Gerontologist if they are interested in reprinting this tool. (CVR Abstract)Item Partner Violence Screen(The Journal of the American Medical Association, 1997) Feldhaus, K.M.; Koziol-McLain, J.; Norton, I.M.; Lowenstein, S.R.; Abbott, J.T.Feldhaus, Koziol-McLain, Norton, Lowenstein, and Abbott developed the Partner Violence Screen (PVS) in 1997 as a simple but effective intimate partner violence screening tool, and PVS was validated in 2011. PVS is designed for use in clinical settings, and is intended to be administered via direct questioning by the medical professional to the client. There are three direct questions within PVS: whether the client has been physically injured in the past year, whether they feel safe in their relationship, and whether any previous partners continue to make them feel unsafe. According to the authors, PVS may “increase the frequency of disclosure of IPV among women” attending outpatient medical clinics because of its direct questioning approach. The authors are careful to note that PVS may not be used in place of the Maternal Risk Identifier (MRI) or the Infant Risk Identifier (IRI) when being used with pregnant women. PVS is validated for use with English-speaking adult women. (CVR Abstract)Item Hurt, Insulted, Threatened with Harm and Screamed Domestic Violence Tool (HITS)(1998) Sherin, K.M.; Sinacore, J.M.; Li, X.; Zitter, R.E.; Shakil, A.Sherin, Sinacore, Li, Zitter, and Shakil developed the public domain Hurt, Insulted, Threatened with Harm and Screamed (HITS) domestic violence screening tool in 1998 to help medical professionals detect abuse. This tool could be integrated into the initial intake process in a family practice or be used if a medical professional suspects abuse may be occurring. HITS encourages clients to quantify the “risk of domestic violence” in their relationship by self-assessing how often toxic behaviors occur. After age, sex, and ethnicity can be entered, HITS centers on a five-by-seven scoring matrix. The left-most column asks “how often does your partner…” and provides the four ‘risk behaviors’ of interest: physical harm, insults, threat of physical harm, and screaming/cursing. Respondents score each of these categories along a continuum of one to five, where one is “Never” and five is “Frequently.” The directions beneath the matrix note that “a score greater than 10 signify that you are at risk of domestic violence abuse” before listing hotlines and providing links to the Baylor Trauma Center in Dallas, Texas, where this tool is currently in use. This tool can be used for both men and women (and nonbinary individuals if the tool administrator adapts proper pronouns). HITS is validated. (CVR Abstract)Item Indicators of Abuse Screen (IOA)(The Gerontological Society of America, 1998) Reis, M.; Nahmiash, D.;Reis and Nahmiash developed and validated the Indicators of Abuse Screen (IOA) in 1998 as a screening tool to allow health and social service agency practitioners to identify elders who are being abused by their caretakers. To use IOA, practitioners first administer a “2-3 hour comprehensive in-home assessment,” then score each of the 27 indicators in the IOA with a score of 0 to 4 based on their “current opinion” after witnessing interactions between caregiver and care receiver during the in-home assessment. The indicators include 12 items for the practitioner to score their opinions of the caregiver’s behavior and 15 items for the practitioner to score the experience of the older adult receiving care. To use IOA to determine the presence of abuse, the authors encourage practitioners to sum the scores assigned to each indicator and consider a total score of 16 or higher to indicate elder abuse. This screening tool is designed for English-speaking adult populations and must be completed by a medical or social service practitioner. IOA is available for public use, but parties should contact The Gerontological Society of America if they are interested in reprinting this tool. (CVR Abstract)Item The Relationships Chart(Trustees of Dartmouth College 1999, 2000) Wasson, J.H.; Jette, A.M.; Anderson, J.; Johnson, D.J.; Nelson, E.C.; Kilo, C.M.Wasson, Jette, Anderson, Johnson, Nelson, and Kilo developed their proprietary intimate partner violence screening tool “The Relationships Chart” in 2000 to function as a routine, single-item screening tool. The Relationships Chart is designed to be self-administered by women visiting their primary care physician/nurse or utilizing outpatient domestic abuse support groups. This tool consists of only four questions, all within one item; it asks “during the past 4 weeks, how often have problems in your household led to: insulting or swearing... yelling... threatening... hitting or pushing?” Respondents are encouraged to then rate their household from 1, “none of the time,” to 5, “all of the time.” The 1-5 rating scale includes pictures of two stick figures demonstrating progressing stages of tension. The Relationships Chart covers both physical and psychological intimate partner violence with these items. The authors validated the tool when they constructed it in 2000 by comparing it to a more extensive IPV survey. The Relationship Chart “had reasonable face and criterion validity and more than met minimum standards for reliability.” (CVR Abstract)Item Women Abuse Screening Tool(Journal of Family Practice, 2000) Brown, J.B.; Lent, B.; Brett, P.J.; Sas, G.; Pederson, L.L.Brown, Lent, Schmidt, and Sas developed the Woman Abuse Screening Tool (WAST) in 2000 as a public domain screening tool for detecting domestic abuse. WAST was designed for use in family medicine, but any medical professional, victim service provider, or appropriately trained law enforcement professional could use WAST during their initial intake process. The WAST questionnaire can either guide practitioners during their interview process with new clients or provide clients a guided opportunity to self-assess. After the first two questions attempt to expose "tension" in a relationship, the following questionnaire items allow respondents to label whether behaviors like physical abuse "often, sometimes, or never" occur. The WAST questionnaire is in English with Spanish-language versions available. A validation study completed by the authors in 2000 found WAST to be a reliable and valid measure of abuse in the family practice setting. (CVR Abstract)Item Actual Abuse Tool(Journal of Elder Abuse and Neglect, 2001) Bass, D.M.; Anetzberger, G.J.; Ejaz, F.K.; Nagpaul, K.;Bass, Anetzberger, Ejaz, and Nagpaul developed the Actual Abuse Tool in 2001 to assist service providers in detecting elder abuse and/or domestic violence among older American adults. This tool provides a list of the major forms of abuse and violence along with examples of physical abuse, psychological abuse, neglect, and exploitation. The Actual Abuse tool is designed for either the victim, a “reliable party,” or medical and service providers to complete. The tool includes 19 bulleted statements separated into four categories that the person administering the tool is supposed to ask as a question, and place a checkmark in that row if they receive an affirmative answer. According to the authors, a single check indicates the perceived presence of abuse. The tool is validated for English-speaking adult populations. This tool is available for public use, but parties should contact the Journal of Elder Abuse and Neglect if they are interested in reprinting this tool. (CVR Abstract)Item Risk of Abuse Tool(Journal of Elder Abuse and Neglect, 2001) Bass, D.M.; Anetzberger, G.J.; Ejaz, F.K.; Nagpaul, K.;Bass, Anetzberger, Ejaz, and Nagpaul developed the Risk of Abuse tool in 2001 to assist social service providers in screening their clients for risk of either perpetrating elder abuse or being victimized by elder abuse and/or domestic violence. The Risk of Abuse tool has 27 questions separated into four categories, with each question matching to either the “Possible Victim” column, “Possible Perpetrator” column, or both columns. This means that a question intended for a possible victim is shaded out in the “Possible Perpetrator,” and vice-versa. A question intended for both possible victim and possible perpetrator is identified by non-shaded columns. Service providers are encouraged to place a check mark in the appropriate row/question if they identify a particular problem/risk factor in one or both columns. The Risk of Abuse tool is available for public use, but parties should contact The Journal of Elder Abuse and Neglect if they are interested in reprinting this tool. (CVR Abstract)
- «
- 1 (current)
- 2
- 3
- »