Child Abuse, Psychiatric Disorder, and Running Away in a Community Sample of Women
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Studies involving clinical samples of adolescents indicate that running away is a common problem associated with substantial emotional impairment, yet little information is available from community-based samples. This study aimed to investigate runaway behaviour in female adolescents with and without a history of maltreatment in childhood. METHOD: We analyzed data from a province-wide community survey conducted in Ontario (n = 3760 girls and women, aged 15 to 64 years). Respondents returned a self-completed questionnaire regarding their history of maltreatment as children. Psychiatric disorder was assessed with a revised version of the Composite International Diagnostic Interview. RESULTS: Respondents who reported physical abuse only, sexual abuse only, and physical abuse with sexual abuse were 2 to 4 times more likely to report running away from home before age 16 years. Parental psychiatric disorder, respondent psychiatric disorder, respondent age, and income were also significant correlates of running away. CONCLUSIONS: Understanding the relation between exposure to maltreatment as a child, psychiatric disorder, and running away in women is important for determining ways to prevent a behaviour that puts youth at high risk for a wide range of difficulties.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".