Risk assessment tools for 0-6 years old children unintentional injuries: A systematic literature analysis.
10.11817/j.issn.1672-7347.2025.240199
- Author:
Yang YUAN
1
;
Li LI
2
;
Guoqing HU
3
Author Information
1. Department of Epidemiology and Health Statistics, Xiangya School of Public Health, Central South University, Changsha 410013, China. 236911003@csu.edu.cn.
2. Department of Epidemiology and Health Statistics, Xiangya School of Public Health, Central South University, Changsha 410013, China. lili1009@csu.edu.cn.
3. Department of Epidemiology and Health Statistics, Xiangya School of Public Health, Central South University, Changsha 410013, China. huguoqing@csu.edu.cn.
- Publication Type:Systematic Review
- Keywords:
children;
drowning;
risk assessment tools;
road traffic injuries;
unintentional injury
- MeSH:
Humans;
Infant;
Child, Preschool;
Child;
Risk Assessment/methods*;
Accidental Injuries/prevention & control*;
Infant, Newborn;
Wounds and Injuries/epidemiology*;
Reproducibility of Results
- From:
Journal of Central South University(Medical Sciences)
2025;50(1):130-142
- CountryChina
- Language:English
-
Abstract:
OBJECTIVES:Injuries are the leading cause of death among children and adolescents. Although numerous risk assessment tools for unintentional injuries in children have been developed and published both domestically and internationally, there is currently no global consensus on standardized use. This study aims to systematically characterize existing unintentional injury risk assessment tools for children aged 0-6 years, with the goal of informing scientific tool selection and optimization.
METHODS:Relevant literature published up to January 2025 was retrieved from CNKI, Wanfang, PubMed, and Web of Science. An information extraction form was developed to gather data on the basic features of each assessment tool, assessment format, scoring methods and criteria, dimensions assessed, reliability and validity, and types of unintentional injuries covered.
RESULTS:A total of 50 risk assessment tools for unintentional injuries among children aged 0-6 years were included. Among them, 35 tools assessed two or more types of unintentional injuries. Regarding assessment format, 38 tools relied on caregiver self-report, 2 on investigator interviews, 3 on direct observation by investigators, and 7 used multiple methods. The tools covered four major dimensions: knowledge, attitude, behavior, and environment. Eleven tools covered 3 dimensions, while only one tool addressed all 4. Nineteen tools provided clear scoring methods, 14 included criteria for risk determination, and only 11 had both scoring methods and risk criteria. Twenty-eight tools lacked both. Twenty-two tools had been evaluated for reliability and/or validity. Among the 25 English-language tools, only 3 had been translated into Chinese.
CONCLUSIONS:Currently, no existing tool comprehensively assesses all major types of unintentional injuries for children under six years of age. It is recommended that practitioners select appropriate tools based on specific needs. In addition, improvements should be pursued, such as translating and validating English-language tools, developing quantitative scoring methods and criteria for tools tailored to Chinese children for important but underrepresented injury types (e.g., road traffic injuries, drowning).
