Journal of public health (Oxford, England) · 2024
Cognitive impairment and exploitation: connecting fragments of a bigger picture through data.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Abubakar Aisha M, Seymour Rowland G, Gardner Alison, Lambert Imogen, Fyson Rachel, Wright Nicola
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Exploitation poses a significant public health concern. This paper highlights 'jigsaw pieces' of statistical evidence, indicating cognitive impairment as a pre- or co-existing factor in exploitation.
METHODS: We reviewed English Safeguarding Adults Collection (SAC) data and Safeguarding Adults Reviews (SARs) from 2017 to 22. Data relevant to exploitation and cognitive impairment were analysed using summary statistics and 'analysis of variance'.
RESULTS: Despite estimates suggesting cognitive impairments may be prevalent among people experiencing exploitation in England, national datasets miss opportunities to illuminate this issue. Although SAC data include statistics on support needs and various forms of abuse and exploitation, they lack intersectional data. Significant regional variations in recorded safeguarding investigations and potential conflation between abuse and exploitation also suggest data inconsistencies. Increased safeguarding investigations for people who were not previously in contact with services indicate that adults may be 'slipping through the net'. SARs, although representing serious cases, provide stronger evidence linking cognitive impairment with risks of exploitation.
CONCLUSIONS: This study identifies opportunities to collect detailed information on cognitive impairment and exploitation. The extremely limited quantitative evidence-base could be enhanced using existing data channels to build a more robust picture, as well as improve prevention, identification and response efforts for 'at-risk' adults.
METHODS: We reviewed English Safeguarding Adults Collection (SAC) data and Safeguarding Adults Reviews (SARs) from 2017 to 22. Data relevant to exploitation and cognitive impairment were analysed using summary statistics and 'analysis of variance'.
RESULTS: Despite estimates suggesting cognitive impairments may be prevalent among people experiencing exploitation in England, national datasets miss opportunities to illuminate this issue. Although SAC data include statistics on support needs and various forms of abuse and exploitation, they lack intersectional data. Significant regional variations in recorded safeguarding investigations and potential conflation between abuse and exploitation also suggest data inconsistencies. Increased safeguarding investigations for people who were not previously in contact with services indicate that adults may be 'slipping through the net'. SARs, although representing serious cases, provide stronger evidence linking cognitive impairment with risks of exploitation.
CONCLUSIONS: This study identifies opportunities to collect detailed information on cognitive impairment and exploitation. The extremely limited quantitative evidence-base could be enhanced using existing data channels to build a more robust picture, as well as improve prevention, identification and response efforts for 'at-risk' adults.