The protective effect of neighbourhood social cohesion on adolescent mental health following stressful life events
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Exposure to stressful life events is an established risk factor for the development of adolescent mental disorder. Growing evidence also suggests that neighbourhood social environments, including strong social cohesion, could have a protective effect on mental health. However, little is known about how neighbourhood social cohesion may buffer against the effects of stressful life events on adolescent mental health. Our aim was to assess whether neighbourhood social cohesion modifies the association between stressful life events and adolescent mental health outcomes. METHODS: Data were drawn from a nationally-representative prospective sample of Canadian adolescents, including 5183 adolescents aged 12/13 years at T1 and 14/15 years at T2. Caregivers reported neighbourhood social cohesion at T1, and exposure to stressful life events between T1 and T2. Symptoms of mental health and behaviour problems were self-reported by adolescents at T1 and T2. Multivariable logistic regression was used to determine whether the relationship between stressful life events and outcomes was modified by neighbourhood social cohesion. RESULTS: Associations between stressful life events and adolescent outcomes were statistically significantly lower in neighbourhoods with greater social cohesion for: depression/anxiety (high cohesion OR = 0.98 v. low cohesion OR = 3.11), suicidal ideation (ORhigh = 1.30 v. ORlow = 5.25), aggression/conduct disorder (ORhigh = 1.09 v. ORlow = 4.27), and property offence (ORhigh = 1.21 v. ORlow = 4.21). CONCLUSIONS: Greater neighbourhood social cohesion appeared to buffer the effects of stressful life events on several domains of adolescent mental health. This potentially presents a target for public health intervention to improve adolescent mental health and behavioural outcomes.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".