Andrew Grogan-Kaylor

Dr. Andrew Grogan-Kaylor

University of Michigan–Ann Arbor, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA
orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

27Years (2000-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
1 July 2017 in Child Abuse & Neglect
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
MMMelissa T. Merrick
Melissa T. Merrick
KPKatie A. Ports
Katie A. Ports
DFDerek C. Ford
Derek C. Ford
Tracie AfifiTracie Afifi
Tracie Afifi
LGLiz Gershoff
Liz Gershoff
AGAndrew Grogan-Kaylor
Andrew Grogan-Kaylor

1 January 2016 in Journal of Family Psychology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
LGLiz Gershoff
Liz Gershoff
AGAndrew Grogan-Kaylor
Andrew Grogan-Kaylor
Whether spanking is helpful or harmful to children continues to be the source of considerable debate among both researchers and the public. This article addresses 2 persistent issues, namely whether effect sizes for spanking are distinct from those for physical abuse, and whether effect sizes for spanking are robust to study design differences. Meta-analyses focused specifically on spanking were conducted on a total of 111 unique effect sizes representing 160,927 children. Thirteen of 17 mean effect sizes were significantly different from zero and all indicated a link between spanking and increased risk for detrimental child outcomes. Effect sizes did not substantially differ between spanking and physical abuse or by study design characteristics. (PsycINFO Database Record

1 August 2012 in American Journal of Psychiatry
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
EWEmily Woltmann
Emily Woltmann
AGAndrew Grogan-Kaylor
Andrew Grogan-Kaylor
BPBrian Perron
Brian Perron
HGHebert Georges
Hebert Georges
AKAmy M. Kilbourne
Amy M. Kilbourne
MBMark S. Bauer
Mark S. Bauer

1 March 2010 in Child Development
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
LGLiz Gershoff
Liz Gershoff
AGAndrew Grogan-Kaylor
Andrew Grogan-Kaylor
JLJennifer E Lansford
Jennifer E Lansford
LCLei Chang
Lei Chang
AZArnaldo Zelli
Arnaldo Zelli
KDKenneth A Dodge
Kenneth A Dodge

1 September 2017 in Child Abuse & Neglect
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
Tracie AfifiTracie Afifi
Tracie Afifi
DFDerek Ford
Derek Ford
EGElizabeth T. Gershoff
Elizabeth T. Gershoff
MMMelissa Merrick
Melissa Merrick
AGAndrew Grogan-Kaylor
Andrew Grogan-Kaylor
RBRobbyn Peters Bennett
Robbyn Peters Bennett
Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACEs) such as child abuse are related to poor health outcomes. Spanking has indicated a similar association with health outcomes, but to date has not been considered an ACE. Physical and emotional abuse have been shown in previous research to correlate highly and may be similar in nature to spanking. To determine if spanking should be considered an ACE, this study aimed to examine 1): the grouping of spanking with physical and emotional abuse; and 2) if spanking has similar associations with poor adult health problems and accounts for additional model variance. Adult mental health problems included depressive affect, suicide attempts, moderate to heavy drinking, and street drug use. Data were from the CDC-Kaiser ACE study (N=8316, response rate=65%). Spanking loaded on the same factor as the physical and emotional abuse items. Additionally, spanking was associated with increased odds of suicide attempts (Adjusted Odds Ratios (AOR)=1.37; 95% CI=1.02 to1.86), moderate to heavy drinking (AOR)=1.23; 95% CI=1.07 to 1.41), and the use of street drugs (AOR)=1.32; 95% CI=1.4 to 1.52) in adulthood over and above experiencing physical and emotional abuse. This indicates spanking accounts for additional model variance and improves our understanding of these outcomes. Thus, spanking is empirically similar to physical and emotional abuse and including spanking with abuse adds to our understanding of these mental health problems. Spanking should also be considered an ACE and addressed in efforts to prevent violence.

1 October 2013 in Medical Care
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
CMChristopher J. Miller
Christopher J. Miller
AGAndrew Grogan-Kaylor
Andrew Grogan-Kaylor
PEPerron Brian E.
Perron Brian E.
AKAmy M. Kilbourne
Amy M. Kilbourne
EWEmily Woltmann
Emily Woltmann
MBMark S. Bauer
Mark S. Bauer
Objective: Prior meta-analysis indicates that collaborative chronic care models (CCMs) improve mental and physical health outcomes for individuals with mental disorders. This study aimed to investigate the stability of evidence over time and identify patient and intervention factors associated with CCM effects to facilitate implementation and sustainability of CCMs in clinical practice. Methods: We reviewed 53 CCM trials that analyzed depression, mental quality of life (QOL), or physical QOL outcomes. Cumulative meta-analysis and metaregression were supplemented by descriptive investigations across and within trials. Results: Most trials targeted depression in the primary care setting, and cumulative meta-analysis indicated that effect sizes favoring CCM quickly achieved significance for depression outcomes, and more recently achieved significance for mental and physical QOL. Four of 6 CCM elements (patient self-management support, clinical information systems, system redesign, and provider decision support) were common among reviewed trials, whereas 2 elements (health care organization support and linkages to community resources) were rare. No single CCM element was statistically associated with the success of the model. Similarly, metaregression did not identify specific factors associated with CCM effectiveness. Nonetheless, results within individual trials suggest that increased illness severity predicts CCM outcomes. Conclusions: Significant CCM trials have been derived primarily from 4 original CCM elements. Nonetheless, implementing and sustaining this established model will require health care organization support. Although CCMs have typically been tested as population-based interventions, evidence supports stepped care application to more severely ill individuals. Future priorities include developing implementation strategies to support adoption and sustainability of the model in clinical settings while maximizing fit of this multicomponent framework to local contextual factors.