Experience of child welfare services and long-term adult mental health outcomes: a scoping review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: This is the first comprehensive review of empirical research that investigated the association between receipt of child welfare services and adult mental health outcomes. The review summarised the results of studies about mental health outcomes of adults with a history of child welfare involvement. METHODS: A scoping review methodology was used to search five electronic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsychINFO, IBSS, Social Policy and Practice). Studies were included if they examined any child welfare exposure (including receipt of services while remaining at home/being placed in care) and adult mental health status. RESULTS: In total 4591 records were retrieved, of which 55 met the eligibility criteria. Overall, receipt of child welfare services was associated with an increased risk of adult mental ill-health, suicide attempt and completed suicide. Results regarding potential moderating factors, such as gender and care-related experiences, were mixed. Relatively few studies investigated the reasons for requiring child welfare services, the experience of abuse or neglect or the adult outcomes of child welfare service users who remained in their own homes. Mental ill-health was defined and measured heterogeneously and details about the nature and type of welfare service utilisation were lacking. CONCLUSION: There is a need for detailed, longitudinal studies to better understand the relative contribution of pre-existing adversity versus experiences during and after exposure to child welfare services on adult mental health outcomes. More standardised measures of mental ill-health and greater detail from authors on specific care exposure are also needed.
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 | 0.008 | 0.047 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.015 | 0.020 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".