The relationship between childhood maltreatment and mental health problems: coping strategies and social support act as mediators
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Childhood maltreatment significantly increases the risk of developing mental health problems in adolescence and adulthood. The present study examines if coping strategies and social support mediate the relationship between childhood maltreatment and mental health problems. METHODS: Data analyzed were from the 2012 Canadian Community Health Survey Mental Health (CCHS-MH, N = 25,113), a national population survey. A structured diagnostic interview, the World Health Organization version of Composite International Diagnostic Interview (WHO-CIDI), was used to assess mental health status. Multiple mediation analysis with structural equation modelling is used to test the mediating effects of coping skills and social support in the relationship between childhood maltreatment and mental health problems. RESULTS: Our findings demonstrate that both coping strategies and social support mediated the link between childhood maltreatment and major depressive episode (mediation proportion: 18.3%), generalized anxiety disorder (mediation proportion: 19.8%), and suicide ideation (mediation proportion: 15.9%). By and large, the study results showed that coping skills and social support had both direct and indirect effects on the studied mental health problems with coping skills having a stronger impact. CONCLUSIONS: Personal resources play an important resilience role in the associations between maltreatment and mental disorders with positive coping strategies, an internal resource, having a stronger protective presence. This research reinforces the need for strengthening positive coping strategies as well as social support as preventive strategies to improve mental health for individuals who have experienced childhood maltreatment.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".