Exploring the Relationship Between Child Maltreatment, Intimate Partner Violence Victimization, and Self-Injurious Thoughts and Behaviors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Child maltreatment is considered a significant risk factor for young adult self-injury; however, the mechanisms that underlie this relationship are not yet understood. To elucidate this association, the mediating role of intimate partner violence victimization in the relationship between child maltreatment and self-injurious thoughts and behaviors was investigated. The sample consisted of 406 young adults (346 females; Mage = 19.87 years; SD = 1.72) involved in a couple relationship. Results of bootstrapping procedures demonstrated that intimate partner violence victimization mediated the relationship between child maltreatment and self-injurious behaviors but did not mediate the association between child maltreatment and self-injurious thoughts. Results suggest that young adults with a history of child maltreatment may be more likely to be exposed to IPV victimization, which, in turn, is associated with the use of self-injurious behaviors, but not the use of self-injurious thoughts. Findings highlight the utility of examining models that incorporate distal and proximal factors contributing to self-injury, and provide direction toward better understanding the relationship experiences of self-injuring young adults.
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 | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".