Exploring the Influence of Reporting Delay on Criminal Justice Outcomes: Comparing Child and Adult Reporters of Childhood Sexual Abuse

Delay between disclosure and reporting child sexual abuse is common and has significant implications for the prosecution of such offenses. While we might expect the relationship to be a linear one with longer delay reducing the likelihood of prosecution, the present study confirms a more complex interaction. Utilizing data from 2,079 police records in Northern Ireland, the study investigated the impact of reporting delay on pretrial criminal justice outcomes for child and adult reporters of child sexual abuse. While teenagers were found to be the group most disadvantaged by reporting delay, increased delay actually appeared advantageous for some groups, notably adult females reporting offenses that occurred when they were 0 to 6 years old. Conversely, adult males reporting child sexual abuse did not appear to benefit from increased delay, suggesting both an adult and gender bias within decision-making processes. The implications for future research are discussed. 

Transparency in Reporting on Charities’ Efficiency: A Framework for Analysis

In recent difficult economic times, the efficiency with which a charity spends the funds entrusted to it has become an increasingly important aspect of charitable performance. Transparency on efficiency, including the reporting of relevant measures and information to understand, contextualise and evaluate such measures, is suggested as important to a range of stakeholders. However, using a novel framework for the analysis of efficiency reporting in the context of transparency and stakeholder theory, this research provides evidence that reporting on efficiency in UK (United Kingdom) charities lacks transparency, both in terms of the extent and manner of disclosure. It is argued that efficiency reporting in UK charities is more concerned with legitimising these organisations rather than providing ethically-driven accounts of their efficiency.

Assessment of lux-marked Pseudomonas fluorescens for reporting on organic carbon compounds

Carbon-flow from plant roots to the rhizosphere provides a major source of nutrients for the soil microbial population. However, quantification of carbon-flow is problematic due to its complex composition. This study investigated the potential of lux-marked Pseudomonas fluorescens to discriminate between forms of carbon present in the rhizosphere by measuring the light response to a range of carbon compounds. Results indicate that bioluminescence of short-term carbon-starved P. fluorescens is dependent upon the source and concentration of carbon. This system, therefore, has the potential to both quantify and qualify organic acids present in rhizodeposits.

COS-STAR: a reporting guideline for studies developing core outcome sets (protocol)

BACKGROUND: Core outcome sets can increase the efficiency and value of research and, as a result, there are an increasing number of studies looking to develop core outcome sets (COS). However, the credibility of a COS depends on both the use of sound methodology in its development and clear and transparent reporting of the processes adopted. To date there is no reporting guideline for reporting COS studies. The aim of this programme of research is to develop a reporting guideline for studies developing COS and to highlight some of the important methodological considerations in the process.

METHODS/DESIGN: The study will include a reporting guideline item generation stage which will then be used in a Delphi study. The Delphi study is anticipated to include two rounds. The first round will ask stakeholders to score the items listed and to add any new items they think are relevant. In the second round of the process, participants will be shown the distribution of scores for all stakeholder groups separately and asked to re-score. A final consensus meeting will be held with an expert panel and stakeholder representatives to review the guideline item list. Following the consensus meeting, a reporting guideline will be drafted and review and testing will be undertaken until the guideline is finalised. The final outcome will be the COS-STAR (Core Outcome Set-STAndards for Reporting) guideline for studies developing COS and a supporting explanatory document.

DISCUSSION: To assess the credibility and usefulness of a COS, readers of a COS development report need complete, clear and transparent information on its methodology and proposed core set of outcomes. The COS-STAR guideline will potentially benefit all stakeholders in COS development: COS developers, COS users, e.g. trialists and systematic reviewers, journal editors, policy-makers and patient groups.

Quality of reporting of dental survival analyses

To explore the quality of reporting (writing and graphics) of articles that used time-to-event analyses to report dental treatment outcomes. A systematic search of the top 50 dental journals in 2008 produced the sample of articles for this analysis. Articles reporting treatment outcomes with (n = 95) and without (n = 91) time-to-event statistics were reviewed. Survival descriptive words used in the two groups were analysed (Pearson's chi-square). The quality of life tables, survival curves and time-to-event statistics were assessed (Kappa analysed agreement) and explored. Words describing dental outcomes 'over time' were more common in time-to-event compared with control articles (77%, 3%, P < 0.001). Non-specific use of 'rate' was common across both groups. Life tables and survival curves were used by 39% and 48% of the time-to-event articles, with at least one used by 82%. Construction quality was poor: 21% of life tables and 28% of survival curves achieved an acceptable standard. Time-to-event statistical reporting was poor: 3% achieved a high and 59% achieved an acceptable standard. The survival statistic, summary figure and standard error were reported in 76%, 95% and 20% of time-to-event articles. Individual statistical terms and graphic aids were common within and unique to time-to-event articles. Unfortunately, important details were regularly omitted from statistical descriptions and survival figures making the overall quality poor. It is likely this will mean such articles will be incorrectly indexed in databases, missed by searchers and unable to be understood completely if identified.

Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015: elaboration and explanation

Protocols of systematic reviews and meta-analyses allow for planning and documentation of review methods, act as a guard against arbitrary decision making during review conduct, enable readers to assess for the presence of selective reporting against completed reviews, and, when made publicly available, reduce duplication of efforts and potentially prompt collaboration. Evidence documenting the existence of selective reporting and excessive duplication of reviews on the same or similar topics is accumulating and many calls have been made in support of the documentation and public availability of review protocols. Several efforts have emerged in recent years to rectify these problems, including development of an international register for prospective reviews (PROSPERO) and launch of the first open access journal dedicated to the exclusive publication of systematic review products, including protocols (BioMed Central's Systematic Reviews). Furthering these efforts and building on the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses) guidelines, an international group of experts has created a guideline to improve the transparency, accuracy, completeness, and frequency of documented systematic review and meta-analysis protocols--PRISMA-P (for protocols) 2015. The PRISMA-P checklist contains 17 items considered to be essential and minimum components of a systematic review or meta-analysis protocol.This PRISMA-P 2015 Explanation and Elaboration paper provides readers with a full understanding of and evidence about the necessity of each item as well as a model example from an existing published protocol. This paper should be read together with the PRISMA-P 2015 statement. Systematic review authors and assessors are strongly encouraged to make use of PRISMA-P when drafting and appraising review protocols.

Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement

Systematic reviews should build on a protocol that describes the rationale, hypothesis, and planned methods of the review; few reviews report whether a protocol exists. Detailed, well-described protocols can facilitate the understanding and appraisal of the review methods, as well as the detection of modifications to methods and selective reporting in completed reviews. We describe the development of a reporting guideline, the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses for Protocols 2015 (PRISMA-P 2015). PRISMA-P consists of a 17-item checklist intended to facilitate the preparation and reporting of a robust protocol for the systematic review. Funders and those commissioning reviews might consider mandating the use of the checklist to facilitate the submission of relevant protocol information in funding applications. Similarly, peer reviewers and editors can use the guidance to gauge the completeness and transparency of a systematic review protocol submitted for publication in a journal or other medium.

Environmental and social supply chain management sustainability practices: construct development and measurement

The purpose of this paper is to conceptualise and operationalise the concept of supply chain management sustainability practices. Based on a multi-stage procedure involving a literature review, expert Q-sort and pre-test process, pilot test and survey of 156 supply chain directors and managers in Ireland, we develop a multidimensional conceptualisation and measure of social and environmental supply chain management sustainability practices. The research findings show theoretically sound constructs based on four underlying sustainable supply chain management practices: monitoring, implementing systems, new product and process development and strategy redefinition. A two-factor model is then identified as the most reliable: comprising process-based and market-based practices.

Going above and beyond: how sustainability culture and entrepreneurial orientation drive social sustainability supply chain practice adoption

Purpose
– This paper aims to examine what drives the adoption of different social sustainability supply chain practices. Research has shown that certain factors drive the adoption of environmental sustainability practices but few focus on social supply chain practices, delineate which practices are adopted or what drives their adoption.

Design/methodology/approach
– The authors examine the facilitative role of sustainability culture to explain the adoption of social sustainability supply chain practices: basic practices, consisting of monitoring and management systems and advanced practices, which are new product and process development and strategic redefinition. The authors then explore the role played by a firm’s entrepreneurial orientation in shaping and reinforcing the adoption of social sustainability supply chain practices. A survey of 156 supply chain managers in multiple industries in Ireland was conducted to test the relationship between the variables.

Findings
– The findings show that sustainability culture is positively related to all the practices, and entrepreneurial orientation impacts and moderates social sustainability culture in advanced social sustainability supply chain adoption.

Research limitations/implications
– As with any survey, this is a single point in time with a single respondent. Implications for managers include finding the right culture in the organisation to implement social sustainability supply chain management practices that go beyond monitoring to behavioural changes in the supply chain with implications beyond the dyad of buyer and supplier to lower tier suppliers and the community surrounding the supply chain.

Practical implications
– The implications for managers include developing and fostering cultural attributes in the organisation to implement social sustainability supply chain management practices that go beyond monitoring suppliers to behavioural changes in the supply chain with implications beyond the dyad of buyer and supplier to lower tier suppliers and the community surrounding the supply chain.

Originality/value
– This is the first time, to the authors’ knowledge, that cultural and entrepreneurial variables have been tested for social sustainability supply chain practices, giving them new insights into how and why social sustainability supply chain practices are adopted.