Pathways From Childhood Maltreatment to Emerging Adulthood
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Longitudinal survey data were used to examine the relationship between two types of childhood maltreatment, abuse/neglect and exposure to intimate partner violence (IPV), and two outcomes, substance use and dating violence, within the past year. Participants were youth (N = 158, aged 16-19 at Time 3) involved with child protective services (CPS). A parallel multiple mediator model was used to test the hypothesis that trauma symptoms would mediate the relationship between both types of maltreatment and dating violence, marijuana, and alcohol use outcomes. Although both types of maltreatment were not directly associated with dating violence and substance use outcomes, the indirect effects of anxiety, anger, and dissociation on the relationship between maltreatment and substance use/dating violence were significant. Direct effects of both types of maltreatment on past year use of dating violence + alcohol use and dating violence + marijuana use were not significant, but results demonstrated a significant indirect effect for anger on the relationship between exposure to IPV and past year dating violence + marijuana use. No other indirect effects were significant. Findings highlight the negative effects of exposure to IPV and have implications for the development of prevention programming for youth transitioning out of CPS.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".