Table 1 Variable definitions and codes
From: Infants and the decision to provide ongoing child welfare services
Variable | Description | Measurement |
|---|---|---|
Outcome | Workers were asked if they planned to keep the case open to provide ongoing services to the family at the conclusion of the investigation | Dichotomous variable: 1 Transfer to ongoing child welfare services 0 Case closure |
Predictors | ||
 Child characteristics |  |  |
  Child sex | Worker identified the sex of the investigated child | Dichotomous variable: 1 Male 0 Female |
  Child functioning | Workers were asked to note up to eighteen child functioning concerns. Six of eighteen dichotomous child functioning variables were relevant to infants: failure to meet developmental milestones, attachment issues, intellectual/developmental disability, FAS/FAE, positive toxicology at birth, and physical disability. This analysis noted whether the worker examined at least one of six of these relevant concerns | 1 At least one child functioning concern noted (suspected or confirmed) 0 No child functioning concerns noted |
  Child ethnicity | Workers were asked to indicate the ethnicity of the child (Black, Latin American, Arab, Aboriginal, Asian). Ethno-racial categories developed by Statistics Canada | Dichotomous variable: 1 Ethnic minority 0 White |
 Caregiver Characteristics | ||
  Primary caregiver age | Workers were asked to indicate the age category of the primary caregiver. | Categorical variable: 1 18 years and under 2 19–21 years 3 22–30 years 4 31–40 years 5 41 years and up |
  Primary caregiver risk factors | Workers could note up to nine risk factors for the primary caregiver. Concerns were: alcohol abuse, drug/solvent abuse, cognitive impairment, mental health issues, physical health issues, few social supports, victim of domestic violence, perpetrator of domestic violence, and history of foster care/group home | Nine dichotomous variables: 1 Suspected or confirmed caregiver risk factors 0 No caregiver risk factors noted |
  Primary income of caregiver | Workers were asked to indicate the primary source of the primary caregiver’s income | Categorical variable: 1 Full time 2 Part-time/seasonal 3 Other benefits/unemployment 4 No income |
  No second caregiver in the home | Workers were asked to describe up to two caregivers in the home. If there was only one caregiver described, it was assumed there was no second caregiver in the home | Dichotomous variable: 1 No second caregiver in home 0 Second caregiver in home |
  Household hazards | Workers were asked to note if the following hazards were present in the home at the time of the investigation: accessible weapons, accessible drugs, production/trafficking of drugs, chemicals/solvents, used in drug production, other home injury hazards, and other home health hazards | Dichotomous variable: 1 At least one household hazard 0 No household hazard |
  Household regularly runs out of money for basic necessities | Workers were asked to note if the household regularly runs out of money for basic necessities including food, shelter and clothing | Dichotomous variable: 1 Family regularly ran out of money 0 Family did not regularly run out of money |
  Number of moves | Workers were asked to note the number of moves the household had in the past 6 months | 2 2 or more moves 1 One move 0 None |
 Case characteristics | ||
  Previous openings | Worker indicated if there were one or more previous child protection openings | 1 One or more previous openings 0 No previous openings |
  Type of investigation | Workers were asked to indicate if the investigation was conducted for a specific maltreatment incident, or if it was to assess a risk of maltreatment only | 1 Maltreatment investigation 2 Risk-only investigation |