MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2613704814 · doi:10.1177/1524838017708783

Childhood Maltreatment and the Risk for Criminal Justice Involvement and Victimization Among Homeless Individuals: A Systematic Review

2017· review· en· W2613704814 on OpenAlexafffund
Hanie Edalati, Tonia L. Nicholls

Bibliographic record

VenueTrauma Violence & Abuse · 2017
Typereview
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHomelessness and Social Issues
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchSimon Fraser University
KeywordsPsycINFONeglectPoison controlCriminal justicePsychiatrySuicide preventionChild abuseInjury preventionClinical psychologyMedicineDomestic violenceOccupational safety and healthSexual abusePhysical abusePsychologySystematic reviewMEDLINEMedical emergencyCriminology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Homeless individuals are at higher risk of criminal justice involvement (CJI) and victimization compared to their housed counterparts. Exposure to childhood maltreatment (CM; e.g., abuse, neglect) is one of the most significant predictors of CJI and victimization among homeless populations. The aim of this systematic review was to synthesize current knowledge regarding the relationship between CM and CJI and victimization among homeless individuals. Guided by the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) methods, a systematic search was performed using PsycINFO, MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature for published studies investigating the relationship between CM and CJI and victimization among homeless samples. We identified 20 studies that met the inclusion criteria. Findings showed that across the majority of studies, CM, and in particular childhood physical (CPA) and sexual (CSA) abuse, is associated with increased risk of both CJI and victimization, regardless of various important factors (e.g., sociodemographic characteristics, psychiatric disorders, substance use). These findings support the need for prevention and treatment for "families at risk" (i.e., for intimate partner violence, child abuse and neglect) and also document the need for trauma-informed approaches within services for homeless individuals. Future research should focus on prospective designs that examine victimization and CJI in the same samples.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.024
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.024
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.006
Bibliometrics0.0090.009
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.101
GPT teacher head0.430
Teacher spread0.329 · 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 designSystematic review
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

Citations33
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTrauma Violence & AbuseSame topicHomelessness and Social IssuesFrench-language works237,207