MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2805537462 · doi:10.1007/s40653-018-0218-8

Community Violence and Associated Psychological Problems Among Adolescents in the General Population

2018· article· en· W2805537462 on OpenAlexafffund
Christine Dubé, Marie‐Hélène Gagné, Marie‐Ève Clément, Claire Chamberland

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Child & Adolescent Trauma · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicChild Abuse and Trauma
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalUniversité du Québec en OutaouaisUniversité LavalCentre hospitalier de l'Université Laval
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsAngerMultivariate analysis of varianceContext (archaeology)PsychologyClinical psychologyWitnessPoison controlSuicide preventionPopulationInjury preventionPublic healthPsychiatryMedicineMedical emergency

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Based on a populational survey conducted among 1400 adolescents aged between 12 and 17 years old, the aim of this study is to assess the relationships between their community violence experiences and their psychological health (anger, depressive symptoms, and post-traumatic stress disorder symptoms). One MANOVA confirms that both boys and girls who report at least one incident of physical community violence present more psychological difficulties, especially anger. Subsequent MANOVAs show that anger intensity varies depending on whether the youth was a direct victim or a witness only, as well as on the diversity of the types of violent manifestations and on acquaintance with the perpetrator, whereas the presence of injuries has no significant effect. This study highlights the importance of considering the context of the community violence incident, to clearly understand its relationships with the youth's psychological difficulties.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.038
Threshold uncertainty score0.726

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.283 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations18
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Child & Adolescent TraumaSame topicChild Abuse and TraumaFrench-language works237,207