The relationship between child protection contact and mental health outcomes among Canadian adults with a child abuse history
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite being a primary response to child abuse, it is currently unknown whether contact with child protection services (CPS) does more good than harm. The aim of the current study was to examine whether contact with CPS is associated with improved mental health outcomes among adult respondents who reported experiencing child abuse, after adjusting for sociodemographic factors and abuse severity. The data were drawn from the 2012 Canadian Community Health Survey-Mental Health (CCHS-2012), which used a multistage stratified cluster design (household-level response rate = 79.8%). Included in this study were individuals aged 18 years and older living in the 10 Canadian provinces (N = 23,395). Child abuse included physical abuse, sexual abuse, and exposure to intimate partner violence (IPV). Mental health outcomes included lifetime mental disorders, lifetime and past year suicidal ideation, plans, and attempts, and current psychological well-being and functioning and distress. All models were adjusted for sociodemographic factors and severity of child abuse. For the majority of outcomes, there were no statistically significant differences between adults with a child abuse history who had CPS contact compared to those without CPS contact. However, those with CPS contact were more likely to report lifetime suicide attempts. These findings suggest that CPS contact is not associated with improved mental health outcomes. Implications are discussed.
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 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".