Interpersonal polyvictimization: Addressing the care planning needs of traumatized children and youth
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Exposure to maltreatment has a detrimental impact on both physical and mental health. However, research on the relationship between polyvictimization and care planning needs is scarce. OBJECTIVES: This study investigated the associations between interpersonal polyvictimization and care planning needs for children and youth, controlling for sex and age differences. PARTICIPANTS AND SETTINGS: = 3.53) between 4 and 18 years. Participants were recruited from over 58 mental health agencies, facilities, and schools in Ontario, Canada between November 2012 and February 2020. METHODS: Multivariate binary logistic regression was used to investigate polyvictimization, sex and age groups, as predictors on care planning outcomes. Significant interaction effects were further examined using simple effects analyses. RESULTS: Children and youth experiencing polyvictimization, compared to those who did not, were more likely to report attachment difficulties, lack of informal support, interpersonal conflict, substance use and harm to self or others. In addition, the relationship between polyvictimization and attachment and interpersonal conflict care planning was moderated by sex. CONCLUSIONS: Findings emphasize the importance of focusing on interpersonal polyvictimization and sex differences when developing treatment plans for a variety of care planning needs. Mental health practitioners could utilize the study findings to guide their clinical practices and ensure effective services are provided to those seeking mental health care.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".