Relationship and community factors related to better mental health following child maltreatment among adolescents
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Research on factors associated with good mental health following child maltreatment is often based on unrepresentative samples and focuses on individual-level factors. To address these gaps, the present study examined the association between relationship- and community-level factors and overall mental health status among adolescents with and without a history of maltreatment in a representative sample. Data were drawn from the National Comorbidity Survey of Adolescents (NCS-A; n=10,148; data collection 2001-2004); a large, cross-sectional, nationally representative sample of adolescents aged 13-17 years from the United States. Having supportive parent and family relationships were significantly associated with good mental health (AOR ranging from 2.1 to 7.1). Positive community and school experiences were also significantly associated with good mental health (AOR ranging from 2.0 to 9.8). In most models, support from friends and siblings was not related to better mental health. Factors to be tested for efficacy in interventions targeted to adolescents with a history of child maltreatment include encouraging supportive parent and family relationships, and fostering positive community and school experiences.
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 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".