The interactions between childhood adversities and recent stress were associated with early‐adulthood depression among Chinese undergraduate students
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: It is widely acknowledged that childhood adversities (CAs) and recent stress are potential risk factors for adult depression. However, the mechanism(s) by which interactions of CAs with recent stress affect adult depression remain unclear. AIMS: To investigate the predictive association of the interaction among CAs and recent stress with early-adult depression. METHOD: We conducted an annual survey of all freshmen for the period of 2016-2018 in a Chinese comprehensive university, with a sample size of 23,206. An online questionnaire including standardized self-report instruments was used to assess sociodemographic factors, childhood experiences of left-behind (CELB), and maltreatments (CEMTs) including beating (CEB), neglect (CEN), sexual abuse (CESA), recent stress, and current depression (measured by the 9-item Patient Health Questionnaire). RESULTS: The correlation of Individual CAs and recent stress was significant. In addition to their significant independent/direct incremental effects, all surveyed CAs were associated with increased severity of early-adult depression, and increased frequency of clinically significant depression (CSD), through significant associations with recent stress (mediation effect). History of CEMTs including CEB, CEN, and CESA significantly increased the effects of recent stress on depression (moderation effect). CONCLUSIONS: Chinese undergraduate students reported frequent history of exposure to CAs, which increased the likelihood of depression in early adulthood, not only directly but also through the increasing the likelihood (mediation effect) and impact (moderation effect) of recent stress on depression. These novel findings may help to extend our understanding of environmental determinants of depression, and to guide further research, clinical practice, and policy in this context.
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 | 0.001 | 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".