Caregiver Vulnerabilities Associated With the Perpetration of Substantiated Child Maltreatment in Canada: Examining the Canadian Incidence Study of Reported Child Abuse and Neglect (CIS) 2008
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Most of the research on caregiver vulnerabilities associated with the perpetration of child maltreatment (CM) focuses on perpetrators of child physical or sexual abuse. Less is known about the association of specific caregiver vulnerabilities and the risk of other CM types or how these vulnerabilities are related to child harm. The aim of the study was to examine the association of caregiver’s vulnerabilities with types of substantiated CM and child physical and mental/emotional harm as a result of maltreatment. Data were from the Canadian Incidence Study of Reported Child Abuse and Neglect collected in 2008 (CIS-2008). The CIS-2008 consisted of investigations of children aged 15 years and younger from 112 child welfare sites across Canada ( N = 15,980). Descriptive statistics and logistic regression were used to examine relationships between caregiver vulnerabilities and outcomes of interest. Caregiver vulnerabilities were prevalent among cases of CM substantiated by child welfare agencies across Canada. Low social support, domestic violence, mental health issues, and substance abuse problems were noted among a substantial proportion of abusive caregivers. Caregiver cognitive impairments and domestic violence perpetration were associated with increased odds of child physical harm, but only among children aged 0 to 4 years. Most individual types of caregiver vulnerabilities were associated with increased odds of child mental or emotional harm across all child age groups. Insight into caregiver vulnerabilities associated with the perpetration of CM may help inform intervention targets prior to a family’s involvement in the child welfare system.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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".