Suitability of Measurement Tools for Assessing the Prevalence of Child Domestic Work: A Rapid Systematic Review
Abstract
:1. Introduction
1.1. Rationale
1.2. Objectives
2. Methods
2.1. Search Strategy
2.2. Selection Criteria
2.3. Data Extraction
2.4. Data Analysis
2.5. Critical Appraisal
2.5.1. Overall Study Appraisal
2.5.2. Measurement Tools Appraisal
3. Results
3.1. Characteristics of Included Papers
3.2. CDW Prevalence Estimates
3.3. Methods and Questions Used to Determine CDW Prevalence
3.4. Live-In versus Live-Out CDW Prevalence Determination
4. Discussion
Key Findings and Recommendations
5. Strengths and Limitations
6. Conclusions
Supplementary Materials
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- ILO IPEC. Child. Domestic Work: Global Estimates 2012; ILO: Geneva, Switzerland, 2013. [Google Scholar]
- Blagbrough, J. Child domestic workers: Protected persons or modern-day slaves? Glob. Dialogue 2012, 14, 82–92. [Google Scholar]
- Blagbrough, J. Children Serving Children: Exploring Relations between Child Domestic Workers and the Children of Employing Families in Mwanza, Tanzania. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Dundee, Dundee, Scotland, 2020. Available online: https://discovery.dundee.ac.uk/en/studentTheses/children-serving-children (accessed on 28 February 2021).
- Jensen, K.B. Learning Skills, Building Social Capital, and Getting an Education: Actual and Potential Advantages of Child Domestic Work in Bangladesh. In Labouring and Learning; Abebe, T., Waters, J., Skelton, T., Eds.; Springer: Singapore, 2017; pp. 1–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- ILO. Practical Guide to Ending Child Labour and Protecting Young Workers in Domestic Work. 2017. Available online: https://www.ilo.org/ipec/Informationresources/WCMS_IPEC_PUB_30476/lang--en/index.htm (accessed on 28 February 2021).
- Mehran, F. ILO Survey on Domestic Workers: Preliminary Guidelines; ILO: Geneva, Switzerland, 2013. [Google Scholar]
- Lyon, S.; Valdivia, C. Towards the Effective Measurement of Child Domestic Workers: Building Estimates Using Standard Household Survey Instruments; Understanding Children’s Work (UCW) Programme: Rome, Italy, 2010. [Google Scholar]
- Prevalence and health, developmental, education and economic outcomes of child domestic work: Overarching rapid reviews protocol. In PROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews. 2019. Available online: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/review_scope.asp (accessed on 28 February 2021).
- Doherty, S.; Oram, S.; Siriwardhana, C.; Abas, M. Suitability of measurements used to assess mental health outcomes in men and women trafficked for sexual and labour exploitation: A systematic review. Lancet Psychiatry 2016, 3, 464–471. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- ACPR, ILO. Baseline Survey on Child Domestic Labour (CDL) in Bangladesh; Associates for Community and Population Research (ACPR), ILO: Dhaka, Bangladesh, 2006. [Google Scholar]
- Gilbert, L.; Reza, A.; Mercy, J.; Lea, V.; Lee, J.; Xu, L.; Marcelin, L.H.; Hast, M.; Vertefeuille, J.; Domercant, J.W. The experience of violence against children in domestic servitude in Haiti: Results from the Violence against Children Survey, Haiti 2012. Child. Abuse Negl. 2018, 76, 184–193. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Suhaimi, U.; Farid, M.N. Toward a Better Estimation of Total Population of Domestic Workers in Indonesia; ILO: Jakarta, Indonesia, 2018. [Google Scholar]
- FAFO. Child Fosterage and Child Domestic Work in Haiti in 2014: Analytical Report; FAFO Institute: Oslo, Norway, 2015. [Google Scholar]
- Kedir, A.M.; Rodgers, P. Household survey evidence on domestic workers in Ethiopia. Serv. Ind. J. 2018, 38, 824–840. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Aberra, M.; Michael, K.; Lemma, I. Child labor and associated problems in a rural town in South West Ethiopia. Ethiop J. Health Dev. 2003, 17, 45–52. [Google Scholar]
- IER, ILO. Survey Report: Child Domestic Workers in Ho Chi Minh City; Institute for Economic Research/ILO: Hanoi, Vietnam, 2006. [Google Scholar]
- Erulkar, A.; Mekbib, T.A. Invisible and vulnerable: Adolescent domestic workers in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. Vulnerable Child Youth Stud. 2007, 2, 246–256. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Budlender, D.; Bosch, D. South Africa Child Domestic Workers: A National Report; ILO, IPEC: Cape Town, South Africa, 2002. [Google Scholar]
- NIS Cambodia, ILO. Child Domestic Worker Survey, Phnom Penh—2003; National Institute of Statistics, Ministry of Planning/ILO IPEC: Phnom Penh, Cambodia, 2004. [Google Scholar]
- Levison, D.; Langer, A. Counting Child Domestic Servants in Latin America. Popul. Dev. Rev. 2010, 36, 125–149. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dalal, K.; Rahman, F.; Gifford, M.; Rahman, A. The magnitude of injury problems among child labourers in a rural community of Bangladesh: Findings from an injury surveillance system. Int. Health 2016, 8, 73–76. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Degraff, D.S.; Ferro, A.R.; Levison, D. In harm’s way: Children’s work in risky occupations in Brazil. J. Int. Dev. 2016, 28, 447–472. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dziadula, E.; Guzman, D. Sweeping It under the Rug: Household Chores and Misreporting of Child Labor. Econ. Bull. 2020, 40, 901–905. [Google Scholar]
- Hedges, S. Children’s Work and Parental Investment in Education in North-Western Tanzania; London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine: London, UK, 2019. [Google Scholar]
- Zolotor, A.J.; Runyan, D.K.; Dunne, M.P.; Jain, D.; Péturs, H.R.; Ramirez, C.; Volkova, E.; Deb, S.; Lidchi, V.; Muhammad, T.; et al. ISPCAN Child Abuse Screening Tool Children’s Version (ICAST-C): Instrument development and multi-national pilot testing. Child. Abuse Negl. 2009, 33, 833–841. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Meinck, F.; Boyes, M.E.; Cluver, L.; Ward, C.L.; Schmidt, P.; DeStone, S.; Dunne, M.P. Adaptation and psychometric properties of the ISPCAN Child Abuse Screening Tool for use in trials (ICAST-Trial) among South African adolescents and their primary caregivers. Child. Abuse Negl. 2018, 82, 45–58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Willis, G. Cognitive Interviewing in Survey Design: State of the Science and Future Directions. In Palgrave Handbook Survey Research; Vannette, D.L., Krosnick, J.A., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2018; pp. 103–107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- UNICEF MICS. Tools—UNICEF MICS. 2020. Available online: https://mics.unicef.org/tools (accessed on 30 November 2020).
- Young Lives. Household and Child Surveys—Young Lives Survey Instruments. 2016. Available online: https://www.younglives.org.uk/content/household-and-child-survey (accessed on 30 November 2020).
- Janzen, S.A. Child labour measurement: Whom should we ask? Int. Labour Rev. 2018, 157, 169–191. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fassa, A.G.; Facchini, L.A.; Mor Dall’Agnol, M.; Christiani, D.C. Child labor and musculoskeletal disorders: The pelotas (Brazil) epidemiological survey. Public Health Rep. 2005, 120, 665–674. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Erulkar, A.; Medhin, G.; Negeri, L. The Journey of Out-of-School Girls in Ethiopia: Examining Migration, Livelihoods, and HIV; Population Council: Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 2017. [Google Scholar]
- Malhotra, R.; Arambepola, C.; Tarun, S.; de Silva, V.; Kishore, J.; Østbye, T. Health issues of female foreign domestic workers: A systematic review of the scientific and gray literature. Int. J. Occup. Environ. Health 2013, 19, 261–277. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sámano-Ríos, M.L.; Ijaz, S.; Ruotsalainen, J.; Breslin, F.C.; Gummesson, K.; Verbeek, J. Occupational safety and health interventions to protect young workers from hazardous work—A scoping review. Saf. Sci. 2019, 113, 389–403. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Scott, N.; Pocock, N. The Health Impacts of Hazardous Chemical Exposures among Child Labourers in Low and Middle Income Countries. Draft Manuscr. 2020. [Google Scholar]
- Des Hommes, T. It’s Time to Talk! Children’s views on Children’s Work; Terre Des Hommes: Emmen, DRENTHE, Netherlands, 2018. [Google Scholar]
- Gamlin, J.; Camacho, A.Z.; Ong, M.; Hesketh, T. Is domestic work a worst form of child labour? The findings of a six-country study of the psychosocial effects of child domestic work. Child. Geogr. 2015, 13, 212–225. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hesketh, T.M.; Gamlin, J.; Ong, M.; Camacho, A.Z.V. The psychosocial impact of child domestic work: A study from India and the Philippines. Arch. Dis Child. 2012, 97, 773–778. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Pocock, N.; Zimmerman, C. Child Domestic Worker prevalence in Myanmar and Southeast Asia: Briefing note. 2019. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dammert, A.C.; Galdo, J. Child Labor Variation by Type of Respondent: Evidence from a Large-Scale Study. World Dev. 2013, 51, 207–220. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Galdo, J.C.; Dammert, A.C. He Said, She Said: Child Labor Measurement in Ethiopia; USAID: Washington, DC, USA, 2019. [Google Scholar]
- Galdo, J.C.; Dammert, A.C.; Abebaw, D. Gender Bias in Agricultural Child Labor: Evidence from Survey Design Experiments. World Bank Econ. Rev. 2020. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Stevens, A.; Garrity, C.; Hersi, M.; Moher, D. Developing PRISMA-RR, a Reporting Guideline for Rapid Reviews of Primary Studies (Protocol); Equator Network; Oxford University: Oxford, UK, 2018. [Google Scholar]
- Vandenbroucke, J.P.; von Elm, E.; Altman, D.G.; Gøtzsche, P.C.; Mulrow, C.D.; Pocock, S.J.; Poole, C.; Schlesselman, J.J.; Egger, M. Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE): Explanation and elaboration. Int. J. Surg. 2014, 12, 1500–1524. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Schulz, K.F.; Altman, D.G.; Moher, D. Group for the C. CONSORT 2010 Statement: Updated Guidelines for Reporting Parallel Group Randomised Trials. PLoS Med. 2010, 7, e1000251. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Study | Setting | Sample Size | Measurement Tool and Sampling Method | Primary Outcomes | Prevalence Estimate for CDW | Study Quality | Tool Quality | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | Kedir & Rodgers 2018 * [14] | Ethiopian urban population | Domestic workers aged >= 10 N = 1500 households (12,000 individuals) | Measurement tool: Ethiopian Urban Household Survey, longitudinal 1994–2004 Sampling method: 1500 households in seven urban centres of Ethiopia (proportional sampling by urban population size, with systematic sampling of households at the ‘kebele’ level in each district | Prevalence estimates of domestic workers | CDW aged 10 to 15: 1994: 17.9% (93/520) 2004: 8.3% (43/517) Denominator: DW who specified age ^ | Poor | Poor |
2 | Gilbert et al. 2018 * [11] | Haitian households displaced by 2010 earthquake (including IDP camps) | CDW (ever been restaveks) aged 13–24 (N = 451/2916) | Measurement tool: Nationally representative cross-sectional household survey of children and young people (Violence Against Children Survey 2012) Sampling method: Stratified, three-stage cluster design used to sample households and camps affected by 2010 earthquake, based on updated estimates from 2003 Haitian census | Prevalence of violence before 18 (physical, emotional, sexual) amongst CDW | Ever restavek before age 18: Female crude n = 281, weighted n = 225,989, (17.4%) Male crude n = 170, weighted n = 159,384 (12.2%) Denominator: 13–24y/o in sample reporting age when became restavek | Good | Poor |
3 | Dalal et al. 2016 * [21] | Child labourers in 3 rural sub-districts, Bangladesh | Child labourers aged 6–17 (N = 42 487, including N = 23,087 CDW) | Measurement tool: District-level injury Surveillance System (2006–2010)–baseline census, followed by periodic representative household survey in three selected sub-districts Sampling method: Child labourers selected from data captured by surveillance system | Prevalence of injury resulting in death or morbidity amongst child labourers across sectors (including domestic work) | CDW: 54.3% (n = 23,087/42,478), all of whom were female Denominator: child labourers 6–17 in sample | Moderate | Poor |
4 | Degraff et al. 2016 * [22] | Children in hazardous labour, Brazil | Children aged 10–17 (N = 60,678, including N = 1129 CDW) | Measurement tool: Nationally representative household survey (PNAD 2001) Sampling method: Not specified | Determinants/characteristics of children employed in hazardous labour (including domestic work) | CDW: 1.82% (491,441/26,973,298, estimated, from 1129/60,678 crude figure)Denominator: children aged 10–17 in sample | Poor | Poor |
5 | Levison & Langer 2010 * [20] | CDW in Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Mexico | CDW aged 10–17 N = various | Measurement tool: IPUMS-International census microdata samples from 1960 to 2002 Sampling method: Census in each country | Number of CDW by country, year, age | CDW weighted estimates vary by country, year, age, live in/out status Live in CDW: Brazil (2000) aged 10–14: 11,600, aged 15–17: 46,200Mexico (2000) aged 10–14: 7600, aged 15–17: 44,100 Denominator: Various. By % in labour force, age groups, CDW prevalence method type | Poor | Poor |
6 | Erulkar & Mekbib 2007 [17] | Adolescents in slum areas of Addis Ababa, Ethiopia | Adolescents aged 10–19 (N = 1074, including 99 female CDW) | Measurement tool: Structured questionnaire. Population-based household survey (2004) Sampling method: Baseline census of all households in the study area to capture basic demographics from all household members (regardless of age). Subsequent random sampling of 1200 households—among households with >1 adolescent (aged 10 to 19), Kish grid used to select 1 adolescent | Prevalence of female adolescent domestic workers, self-esteem, Social connection & support | Female CDW aged 10–19: 14.6% (99/676) Denominator: females aged 10–19 in sample | Good | Poor |
7 | Aberra et al. 2003 [15] | Child labourers and non-working controls in Shebe (rural town), Ethiopia | Child labourers aged 5–14 N = 289, including CDW N = 176 | Measurement tool: Structured questionnaire household survey (2001) Sampling method: Sample size derived from estimated total population in Shebe from Municipality office records + arbitrary estimate of child labour (50%). Systematic sampling to recruit study participants: 1st household selected via lottery method; subsequently 1 child from every 4th household was selected (lottery method applied for households with >1 child) | Prevalence of child labour and associated problems (abuse and injury) | CDW (paid or unpaid): 77.2% (176/228) Denominator: child labourers aged 5–14 in sample | Poor | Moderate |
8 | Budlender & Bosch/ILO 2002 * [18] | CDW in South Africa | Working children aged 5–17 N = 3,476,358 (including CDW N = 53,942) (no crude N, weighted estimates) | Measurement tool: Household survey (SIMPOC SAYP, 1999) Sampling method: Phase 1: 30,550 households surveyed in 9 provinces, which provided information on 33,000 children aged 5–17. Second phase: probability sub-sampling for detailed survey on children’s activities of 6110 households containing at least one child doing work of some kind, which collected information on approximately 10,000 children. Results for both phases weighted to make them representative for 5–17 y/os in South Africa | Prevalence of CDW and occupational risks and injuries | CDW aged 5–17: weighted estimate 2% (53,942/3,476,358), 62% male Denominator: children doing economic work | Poor | Poor |
9 | NIS/ILO 2004 [19] | CDW in Phnom Penh, Cambodia | CDW aged 7–17, N = 293 in N = 2500 households | Measurement tool: Household surveys in Phnom Penh and one migrant sending province + surveys with CDWs, parents/guardians of CDW in origin villages and village chiefs Sampling method: Sample frame based on 1998 census. First stage: random selection of 125 villages without replacement. Second stage: Villages with > 200 households selected to divide into clusters, randomly chosen for household listing. Third stage: Linear systematic sampling of 20 households from listing in each of 125 villages. Fourth stage: identify CDWs in survey, then revisit to conduct detailed interview with adults, CDWs and their parents, depending on which situation the household presented | CDW prevalence, violence prevalence, work-related illness and injury, mental health | CDW aged 7–17: weighted estimate 9.6% (27,950/292,119) (crude 293/2500 households, all live in), 59% female Denominator: total estimated number of children in Phnom Penh | Moderate | Moderate |
10 | ACPR/ILO Bangladesh 2006 [10] | CDW in Bangladesh | CDW aged 5–17, N = 3841 in N = 3805 employer households | Measurement tool: Household survey, + surveys with CDWs and employers in selected households Sampling method: Two-stage cluster sampling. 725 urban and rural Primary Sampling Units (PSUs) selected in 5 cities (excluding Dhaka) based on 2001 census data using circular systematic method with probability proportional to size. First stage: after dividing regions into stratum, PSUs divided into equal segments of 125 households, one segment purposively selected where CDW concentration expected to be high, another segment randomly selected, for household listing (N = 167,051). Second stage: sampling frame drawn up of households with CDW. Six households in segments with high CDW concentration and 4 households from other segments then selected via simple random sampling without replacement | CDW prevalence, violence prevalence, work-related illness and treatment seeking | CDW aged 6–17: weighted estimate 421,486, 78% female. Overall, 1.1% of all households employ CDWs Denominator: All households in Bangladesh | Moderate | Good |
11 | IER/ILO Vietnam 2006 [16] | CDW in Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam | CDW aged 6–17, N = 100 Employers N = 10Parents N = 8 | Measurement tool: structured surveys with CDW, employers and guardians Sampling method: Two-stage cluster sampling + snowball sampling. First stage: Random selection of 100/8989 clusters of households in 8 selected districts (divided into core districts, districts with family businesses with CDW, districts based on probability proportional to size) for household listing, to identify CDW. Second stage: Random sampling of CDW listed households in 100 clusters, finding 20 CDW. Repeated for another 100 clusters, findings 19 CDW. Third stage: Snowball sampling of 61 CDWs (most interviewed without employer’s permission). | CDW prevalence & characteristics, work-related abuses and health | CDW aged 6–17: weighted estimate 2162 (crude 39/200 households) in Ho Chi Minh City, 70% female Denominator: Not specified | Poor | Poor |
12 | Suhaimi & Farid/ILO 2018 [12] | Domestic workers and CDW in Indonesia | CDW aged 10–17 Domestic workers N = 136 in 1000 households (probing module) | Measurement tool: household survey, with an additional module onto the standard Labour Force Survey questions probing domestic work tasks Sampling method: Stratified 4 stage sampling. Sample frame based on census (2010). First stage: 10 districts selected as primary sampling units (PSU) by probability proportional to size (PPS) on number of live-in DWs based on census, stratified by typology. Second: 10 clusters (villages) in each district selected by PPS of live-in DWs based on census. Third: Simple random selection of sub-villages to conduct household listing. Fourth: Systematic sampling of 10 households in each selected sub-village | Prevalence of domestic workers, including CDW, based on a survey module used to identify adjustment factors applied to standard LFS data for revised, more realistic DW/CDW estimates | CDW weighted estimates vary by year, example: CDW aged 10–17: adjusted & weighted estimate 85,574 (2015), 93% female CDW aged 10–17 in LFS: 31,000 (2015) Denominator: Not specified Relative Standard Errors larger for CDW than for DWs overall. Higher possibility of under coverage of CDW in Java regencies | Moderate | Moderate |
13 | Lyon & Valdivia 2010 * [7] | CDW in Paraguay, Uganda, Venezuela | CDW aged 10–17, varies by country and type of CDW | Measurement tool: Household surveys in 3 countries with child labour modules, used to estimate CDW prevalence in 3 categories: (1) Commuting and live in CDWs; (2) Live in CDWs only; (3) CDWs under guise of fostering or adoption. Surveys mainly based on World Bank Living Standards Measurement Surveys (LSMS), some based on ILO SIMPOC and UNICEF MICS. Sampling method: Not specified | Prevalence of CDWs based on different categories of commuting, live-in and ‘disguised’ (via fostering and adoption) CDWs | CDW estimates vary by category, country, example: CDW aged 10–17 in Paraguay: weighted estimate 4.0% (43,792) including all CDW categories Denominator: all children aged 10–17 | Poor | Poor |
14 | FAFO 2015 [13] | CDW and working children in Haiti | Children aged 5–17 N = 1617 in N = 2078 households | Measurement tool:Haiti Child Domestic Workers Survey (HCDWS 2014). Household survey + questionnaire for randomly selected child Sampling method: Two-stage cluster sampling, with sample frame based on census (2003), stratified by urban/rural. Stage 1: 80 randomly selected clusters based on PPS to the number of households in each cluster. Each cluster was mapped, and households listed and screened for the presence of children not living with parents, with 13,402 households visited for screening. Two lists made in each cluster: one for households hosting children without parents, second for households with children not separated from parents. In each cluster, 20 households in the ‘without parents’ list, 7 households in the ‘with parents’ list, were randomly selected. Households without children aged 5–17 were ineligible | Prevalence of CDW, violence (physical or sexual), physical health problems and depression symptoms | CDW aged 5–17: weighted estimate 407,000 (95% CI: 335,000–494,000) (crude 727 in sample) CDW aged 5–9: 7% (5.3–9.2) CDW aged 10–14: 16.3% (12.5–21.1) CDW aged 15–17: 17% (12.4–22.9) Denominator: various. By age group and permissible hours (95% CI stated above), living with/without parents, education status | Moderate | Poor |
# | Study | Household Roster | Occupation Based (ISCO) | Industry Based (ISIC) | Task List Based *** | Unclear/Not Reported | Live in and Live out Estimates † | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
HH Head | Direct Report ** | HH Head | Direct Report | HH Head | Direct Report | |||||
1 | Kedir & Rodgers 2018 * | X | Live in only | |||||||
2 | Gilbert et al. 2018 * | X | Live in only | |||||||
3 | Dalal et al. 2016 * | X | Live in only | |||||||
4 | DeGraff et al. 2016 * | X | Unclear | |||||||
5 | Levison & Langer 2010 *^ | X | X | X | Both | |||||
6 | Erulkar & Mekbib 2007 ^ | X | X | Live in only | ||||||
7 | Aberra et al. 2003 | X | Unclear | |||||||
8 | Budlender & Bosch ILO 2002 * | X | Unclear | |||||||
9 | NIS/ILO Cambodia 2004 | X | X | X | X | X | X | Live in only | ||
10 | ACPR/ILO Bangladesh 2006 | X | X | Live in only | ||||||
11 | IER/ILO Vietnam 2006 | X | Live in only | |||||||
12 | Suhaimi & Farid/ILO 2018 | X | X | X | X | Both | ||||
13 | Lyon & Valvidia 2010 *^ | X | X | X | Both | |||||
14 | FAFO 2015 | X | X | X | X | Live in only | ||||
TOTAL ^^ | 7 | 9 | 4 | 4 | 3 | 4 |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Pocock, N.S.; Chan, C.W.; Zimmerman, C. Suitability of Measurement Tools for Assessing the Prevalence of Child Domestic Work: A Rapid Systematic Review. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 2357. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18052357
Pocock NS, Chan CW, Zimmerman C. Suitability of Measurement Tools for Assessing the Prevalence of Child Domestic Work: A Rapid Systematic Review. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2021; 18(5):2357. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18052357
Chicago/Turabian StylePocock, Nicola S., Clara W. Chan, and Cathy Zimmerman. 2021. "Suitability of Measurement Tools for Assessing the Prevalence of Child Domestic Work: A Rapid Systematic Review" International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 18, no. 5: 2357. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18052357