MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1507473039

An ecological analysis of child sexual abuse disclosure: considerations for child and adolescent mental health.

2010· article· en· W1507473039 on OpenAlexaff
Ramona Alaggia

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicChild Abuse and Trauma
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIntervention (counseling)Mental healthPsychologySexual abuseSelf-disclosureDevelopmental psychologyChild sexual abuseSuicide preventionMeaning (existential)Clinical psychologyPoison controlPsychiatryMedicineSocial psychologyPsychotherapist
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: Research continues to indicate a concerning number of children and youth, between 60-80%, withhold disclosure until adulthood suggesting that many children endure prolonged victimization or never receive necessary intervention. The study aim was to qualitatively identify factors that impede or promote child sexual abuse (CSA) disclosure. METHODS: Using a phenomenological design, forty adult survivors of CSA were interviewed about their disclosure experiences to provide retrospective accounts of their childhood and adolescent abuse experiences, disclosure attempts, and meaning-making of these experiences. RESULTS: Findings show that disclosure is multiply determined by a complex interplay of factors related to child characteristics, family environment, community influences, and cultural and societal attitudes. An ecological analysis is offered to understand these complexities. Unless barriers to disclosure are eradicated, negative effects of CSA can persist manifesting in serious mental health issues. CONCLUSIONS: Practitioners can expect to work with children, adolescents and adults who have withheld disclosure or attempted to tell over time having experienced a wide range of responses. Multi-level intervention is recommended at the individual, community and macro-levels. Future investigations should focus on how to identify and measure the impact of community and macro level factors on disclosure, aspects that have received much less attention.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.368
Threshold uncertainty score0.436

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.030
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.269 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations132
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicChild Abuse and TraumaFrench-language works237,207