MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The sequelae of child maltreatment

2001· article· en· W2320271921 on OpenAlexaff
Harriet L. MacMillan, Catharine Munn

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Opinion in Psychiatry · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicChild Abuse and Trauma
Canadian institutionsHamilton Health Sciences
Fundersnot available
KeywordsContext (archaeology)ConfoundingScope (computer science)PsychologyClinical psychologySexual abusePoison controlChild abuseChild sexual abuseMedicineHuman factors and ergonomicsDevelopmental psychologyPsychiatryMedical emergency

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This review examines the evidence for a link between exposure to one or more types of child maltreatment and a range of impairments. Much of the literature continues to focus on the effects of child sexual abuse, but increasingly investigators are assessing multiple exposures and using longitudinal designs to control for confounding factors such as family dysfunction. The emphasis of this review is on reports published since 1 January 2000; however, findings arising from these studies are put into the context of key articles that may have been published before this date. Progress has been made in assessing a broader scope of effects, including personality disorders, long-term physical impairment, medical utilization and neurobiological correlates. Developing more rigorous approaches to the measurement of child maltreatment exposure continues to be essential to improving our understanding about sequelae and their underlying mechanisms.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.359
Teacher spread0.317 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations62
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Opinion in PsychiatrySame topicChild Abuse and TraumaFrench-language works237,207