Abstract

BackgroundUnderreporting of childhood sexual abuse is a major barrier to obtaining reliable prevalence estimates. We tested the sensitivity and specificity of the face-to-face-interview (FTFI) method by comparing the number of disclosures of forced sex against a more confidential mode of data collection, the sealed-envelope method (SEM). We also report on characteristics of individuals associated with non-disclosure in FTFIs.MethodsSecondary analysis of data from a cross-sectional survey conducted in 2014, with n = 3843 children attending primary school in Luwero District, Uganda. Sensitivity and specificity were calculated, and mixed effects logistic regression models tested factors associated with disclosure in one or both modes.ResultsIn the FTFI, 1.1% (n = 42) of children reported ever experiencing forced sex, compared to 7.0% (n = 268) in the SEM. The FTFI method demonstrated low sensitivity (13.1%, 95%CI 9.3–17.7%) and high specificity (99.8%, 95%CI 99.6–99.9%) in detecting cases of forced sex, when compared to the SEM. Boys were less likely than girls to disclose in the FTFI, however there was no difference in prevalence by sex using the SEM (aOR = 0.91, 95%CI 0.7–1.2; P = 0.532). Disclosing experience of other forms of sexual violence was associated with experience of forced sex for both modes of disclosure.ConclusionsThe SEM method was superior to FTFIs in identifying cases of forced sex amongst primary school children, particularly for boys. Reporting of other forms of sexual violence in FTFIs may indicate experience of forced sex. Future survey research, and efforts to estimate prevalence of sexual violence, should make use of more confidential disclosure methods to detect childhood sexual abuse.

Highlights

  • Underreporting of childhood sexual abuse is a major barrier to obtaining reliable prevalence estimates

  • We explored factors associated with an affirmative response in the sealed-envelope method (SEM), to determine what differentiates students who did not disclose forced sex in the FTFI from those who did not experience forced sex

  • For research studies focused on Child sexual abuse (CSA) it is important that the data collection mode and participation in such studies does not cause discomfort or harm to the participants

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Underreporting of childhood sexual abuse is a major barrier to obtaining reliable prevalence estimates. We tested the sensitivity and specificity of the face-to-face-interview (FTFI) method by comparing the number of disclosures of forced sex against a more confidential mode of data collection, the sealed-envelope method (SEM). We report on characteristics of individuals associated with non-disclosure in FTFIs. Child sexual abuse (CSA) is a global issue, and is associated with lifelong health and psychological consequences [1,2,3,4]. CSA encompasses a range of acts, from verbal sexual comments and unwanted touching, to forced sex. Gold-standard methods for measuring exposure centre around asking participants to self-report experience of specific acts of violence, to avoid subjective classification of what constitutes abuse. Disclosure can potentially put participants at risk of retaliation, social exclusion and without access to their basic needs, if the perpetrator is someone they are dependent upon [6]

Objectives
Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call