Exposure to family violence from childhood to adulthood
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Both childhood maltreatment (CM) and intimate partner violence (IPV) are public health problems that have been related to a wide range of adverse health consequences. However, studies examining associations between specific types of CM and experiencing IPV in adulthood have yielded conflicting results. METHODS: Using data from 10,608 men and 11,458 women aged 18 or older from Canada's 2014 General Social Survey, we examined associations between three types of CM-childhood physical abuse (CPA), childhood sexual abuse (CSA), and childhood exposure to IPV -and subsequent intimate partner violence (IPV) in adulthood (physical, sexual or emotional). RESULTS: When potential confounders were controlled, CPA, CSA and childhood exposure to IPV were associated with IPV in adulthood for both sexes (odds ratios, 1.7, 1.8 and 2.0 for men, and 2.2, 2.0 and 2.1 for women). When severity and frequency of CM were examined, a dose-response relationship between all three types of CM and IPV in adulthood was observed among women (meaning that as the severity/frequency of CM increased, the likelihood of reporting IPV also increased); among men, a dose-response relationship was observed only for CPA. CONCLUSIONS: The association between CM and IPV in adulthood is particularly concerning because experiencing multiple forms of trauma has cumulative effects. Lifespan studies have shown that individuals who experience multiple incidents of abuse exhibit the highest levels of impairment. This underscores the importance of programs to eradicate both CM and IPV. This underscores the importance of programs to eradicate both CM and IPV. Future research should focus on assessing interventions designed to promote healthy relationships and the provision of emotional support and coping mechanisms to children and families in abusive situations.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".