Screening for adverse childhood experiences in pediatrics: A randomized trial of aggregate-level versus item-level response screening formats

Abstract

Background While there is growing support for screening for Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACEs), rigorous evidence on the efficacy and preference of screening methods is needed. Objective To examine caregiver: (1) rates of disclosure of their child’s exposure to ACEs using item-level response (each item can be endorsed) versus aggregate-level response (only total score reported) screening format, (2) associations between family demographic factors and disclosure by screening format, and (3) emotional reaction and experience of screening formats in a diverse, low-income pediatric population. Methods Caregiver participants (n = 367) were randomized to complete the Pediatric ACEs and Related Life Events Screener (PEARLS) tool, in an aggregate-level response vs item-level response format from 2016–2019. Select caregivers (n = 182) participated in debriefing interviews. T-test and chi-square analyses in 2019 compared PEARLS disclosure rates and reactions between the screening modalities. Regression models explored interactions with child characteristics. Thematic analysis of interview notes captured caregiver screening experience. Results PEARLS disclosure rates were significantly higher in the aggregate-level response compared to the item-level response screening arm (p <0.05). This difference was accentuated for children identified as black and/or male (p <0.05). Caregiver reactions to PEARLS screening were rarely negative in either screening format. Qualitative data demonstrated strong caregiver preference for the item-level response format; additional themes include provider relationship, fear with disclosure, and screening outcome expectations. Conclusion While caregivers reported a preference for the item-level response format, the aggregate-level response screening format elicited higher disclosures rates particularly for children who are black or ma.