Health Inequalities in Children and Adolescents: A Scoping Review of the Mediating and Moderating Effects of Family Characteristics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This scoping review systematically mapped evidence of the mediating and moderating effects of family characteristics on health inequalities in school-aged children and adolescents (6–18 years) in countries with developed economies in Europe and North America. We conducted a systematic scoping review following the PRISMA extension for Scoping Reviews recommendations. We searched the PubMed, PsycINFO and Scopus databases. Two reviewers independently screened titles, abstracts and full texts. Evidence was synthesized narratively. Of the 12,403 records initially identified, 50 articles were included in the synthesis. The included studies were conducted in the United States (n = 27), Europe (n = 18), Canada (n = 3), or in multiple countries combined (n = 2). We found that mental health was the most frequently assessed health outcome. The included studies reported that different family characteristics mediated or moderated health inequalities. Parental mental health, parenting practices, and parent-child-relationships were most frequently examined, and were found to be important mediating or moderating factors. In addition, family conflict and distress were relevant family characteristics. Future research should integrate additional health outcomes besides mental health, and attempt to integrate the complexity of families. The family characteristics identified in this review represent potential starting points for reducing health inequalities in childhood and adolescence.
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 | 0.015 | 0.061 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.014 | 0.016 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| 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".