Are Screening Tools for Identifying Human Trafficking Victims in Health Care Settings Validated? A Scoping Review

Author:

Hainaut Mathilde1ORCID,Thompson Katherine J.2ORCID,Ha Caryn J.3ORCID,Herzog Hayley L.45ORCID,Roberts Timothy6ORCID,Ades Veronica789

Affiliation:

1. Miller School of Medicine, University of Miami, Miami, FL, USA

2. College of Arts and Science, New York University, New York, NY, USA

3. Graduate School of Arts and Science, Georgetown University, Washington, DC, USA

4. School of Global Public Health, New York University, New York, NY, USA

5. Wagner Graduate School of Public Service, New York University, New York, NY, USA

6. NYU Grossman School of Medicine, Health Sciences Library, New York University, New York, NY, USA

7. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Jacobi Medical Center, Bronx, NY, USA

8. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, NYU Grossman School of Medicine, New York University, New York, NY, USA

9. Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Women’s Health, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, NY, USA

Abstract

Objective: Although many screening tools, resources, and programs for identifying victims of human trafficking exist, consensus is lacking on which tools are most useful, which have been validated, and whether they are effective. The objectives of this study were to determine what tools exist to identify or screen for victims of human trafficking in health care settings and whether these tools have been validated. Method: We conducted a scoping review of the literature on human trafficking identification in health care settings following the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses) protocol for scoping reviews. We searched the MEDLINE, PsycInfo, Embase, and Scopus databases without language or date limitations. Two independent reviewers screened each citation. We included human research studies in English with populations of all ages, all genders, all geographic locations, and using quantitative and/or qualitative research methods. We excluded studies that were not conducted in a health care setting, review articles, and meta-analyses. We summarized additional screening tools available online and identified through hand-searching. Results: Database searches yielded 8730 studies, of which 4806 remained after removing duplicates. We excluded 4720 articles based on title/abstract review, we reviewed 85 full-text studies for eligibility, and we included 8 articles. Hand-searching revealed 9 additional screening tools not found in the literature. Through our search for validated screening tools, only 6 had been studied for validation in health care settings. Conclusions: Few studies have evaluated screening tools for identifying victims of human trafficking in health care settings. The absence of a gold standard for human trafficking screening and lack of consensus on the definition of human trafficking make screening tool validation difficult. Further research is required for the development of safe, effective approaches to patient screening.

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Subject

Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3