Childhood sexual abuse and substance abuse: A gender paradox?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We examine associations between childhood sexual abuse (CSA) and substance abuse, the role of mental health indicators as mediators in these associations and whether or not associations differ by gender. Data are from 14,063 respondents aged 18-76 years from the 2004-2005 Canadian Gender, Alcohol, and Culture: An International Study (GENACIS). Multiple logistic regression models were used to examine associations between CSA and substance abuse variables, controlling for socio-demographic factors. Odds were adjusted by indicators of mental health to assess if these variables mediated associations between CSA and substance abuse. Tests of interactions between sex and CSA were conducted to see if gender differences exist in associations. In 2004/2005, CSA was reported by 14% of women and 5% of men. CSA was associated with heavy drinking, hazardous drinking, and the use of marijuana, other illicit drugs, and off-label drugs. Associations were only very marginally attenuated when controlling for depression and self-perceived emotional/mental health. In all cases previously observed significant associations persisted. Evidence of gender differences in associations between CSA and substance abuse was negligible. Preventing CSA may also reduce substance abuse.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 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".