Prevalence, type, and correlates of trauma exposure among adolescent men and women in Soweto, South Africa: implications for HIV prevention
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Youth trauma exposure is associated with syndemic HIV risk. We measured lifetime prevalence, type, and correlates of trauma experience by gender among adolescents living in the HIV hyper-endemic setting of Soweto, South Africa. METHODS: Using data from the Botsha Bophelo Adolescent Health Survey (BBAHS), prevalence of "ever" experiencing a traumatic event among adolescents (aged 14-19) was assessed using a modified Traumatic Event Screening Inventory-Child (TESI-C) scale (19 items, study alpha = 0.63). We assessed self-reported number of potentially traumatic events (PTEs) experienced overall and by gender. Gender-stratified multivariable logistic regression models assessed independent correlates of 'high PTE score' (≥7 PTEs). RESULTS: Overall, 767/830 (92%) participants were included (58% adolescent women). Nearly all (99.7%) reported experiencing at least one PTE. Median PTE was 7 [Q1,Q3: 5-9], with no gender differences (p = 0.19). Adolescent men reported more violent PTEs (e.g., "seen an act of violence in the community") whereas women reported more non-violent HIV/AIDS-related PTEs (e.g., "family member or someone close died of HIV/AIDS"). High PTE score was independently associated with high food insecurity among adolescent men and women (aOR = 2.63, 95%CI = 1.36-5.09; aOR = 2.57, 95%CI = 1.55-4.26, respectively). For men, high PTE score was also associated with older age (aOR = 1.40/year, 95%CI = 1.21-1.63); and recently moving to Soweto (aOR = 2.78, 95%CI = 1.14-6.76). Among women, high PTE score was associated with depression using the CES-D scale (aOR = 2.00, 95%CI = 1.31-3.03,) and inconsistent condom use vs. no sexual experience (aOR = 2.69, 95%CI = 1.66-4.37). CONCLUSION: Nearly all adolescents in this study experienced trauma, with gendered differences in PTE types and correlates, but not prevalence. Exposure to PTEs were distributed along social and gendered axes. Among adolescent women, associations with depression and inconsistent condom use suggest pathways for HIV risk. HIV prevention interventions targeting adolescents must address the syndemics of trauma and HIV through the scale-up of gender-transformative, youth-centred, trauma-informed integrated HIV and mental health services.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".