MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2086463009 · doi:10.1017/s2045796015000104

Childhood adversity and subsequent mental health status in adulthood: screening for associations using two linked surveys

2015· review· en· W2086463009 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Scott B. Patten, T. Christopher Wilkes, Jeanne V.A. Williams, Dina H. Lavorato, Nady el‐Guebaly, T. Cameron Wild, Ian Colman, Andrew G. M. Bulloch

Bibliographic record

VenueEpidemiology and Psychiatric Sciences · 2015
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicChild Abuse and Trauma
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaProvincial Laboratory of Public HealthUniversity of AlbertaUniversity of Calgary
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchAlberta InnovatesAlberta Centre for Child, Family and Community Research
KeywordsMedicineLongitudinal studyMental healthPolysubstance dependenceGeeClinical psychologyPopulationPsychiatryGeneralized estimating equationSubstance abuseDemographyPsychologyEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIMS: Accumulating evidence links childhood adversity to negative health outcomes in adulthood. However, most of the available evidence is retrospective and subject to recall bias. Published reports have sometimes focused on specific childhood exposures (e.g. abuse) and/or specific outcomes (e.g. major depression). Other studies have linked childhood adversity to a large and diverse number of adult risk factors and health outcomes such as cardiovascular disease. To advance this literature, we undertook a broad examination of data from two linked surveys. The goal was to avoid retrospective distortion and to provide a descriptive overview of patterns of association. METHODS: A baseline interview for the Canadian National Longitudinal Study of Children and Youth collected information about childhood adversities affecting children aged 0-11 in 1994. The sampling procedures employed in a subsequent study called the National Population Health Survey (NPHS) made it possible to link n = 1977 of these respondents to follow-up data collected later when respondents were between the ages of 14 and 27. Outcomes included major depressive episodes (MDE), some risk factors and educational attainment. Cross-tabulations were used to examine these associations and adjusted estimates were made using the regression models. As the NPHS was a longitudinal study with multiple interviews, for most analyses generalized estimating equations (GEE) were used. As there were multiple exposures and outcomes, a statistical procedure to control the false discovery rate (Benjamini-Hochberg) was employed. RESULTS: Childhood adversities were consistently associated with a cluster of potentially related outcomes: MDE, psychotropic medication use and smoking. These outcomes may be related to one another since psychotropic medications are used in the treatment of major depression, and smoking is strongly associated with major depression. However, no consistent associations were observed for other outcomes examined: physical inactivity, excessive alcohol consumption, binge drinking or educational attainment. CONCLUSIONS: The conditions found to be the most strongly associated with childhood adversities were a cluster of outcomes that potentially share pathophysiological connections. Although prior literature has suggested that a very large number of adult outcomes, including physical inactivity and alcohol-related outcomes follow childhood adversity, this analysis suggests a degree of specificity with outcomes potentially related to depression. Some of the other reported adverse outcomes (e.g. those related to alcohol use, physical inactivity or more distal outcomes such as obesity and cardiovascular disease) may emerge later in life and in some cases may be secondary to depression, psychotropic medication use and smoking.

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)0.018
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.767
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0180.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.237
GPT teacher head0.471
Teacher spread0.233 · 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.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations21
Published2015
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEpidemiology and Psychiatric SciencesSame topicChild Abuse and TraumaFrench-language works237,207