Family Victimization Among Canadian Sexual and Gender Minority Adolescents and Emerging Adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives: This paper examines family victimization, well-being, and resilience among sexual and gender minority (SGM) adolescents and emerging adults aged 15 to 29 years. Methods: Self-reported data were collected online (2019-2020) from 1,971 Canadian SGM youths. We used logistic regression to estimate the odds of: (a) having experienced family victimization over the past 12 months; (b) reporting well-being across the various frequencies of family victimization; and (c) thriving (i.e., flourishing despite having experienced family victimization). Results: About 36% of participants experienced family victimization within the previous 12 months, with 13% reporting recurrent family victimization. Recurrent victimization was more prevalent among trans and nonbinary youths as compared to cisgender men, and was also more prevalent among socioeconomically disadvantaged participants. Recurrent victimization was significantly associated with higher odds of reporting internalized heterosexism, efforts to conceal gender and sexual orientation, languishing mental health, social anxiety, loneliness, and post-traumatic stress symptoms. Thriving participants were less likely to experience activity restrictions or to live with at least one parent, and more likely to score higher on authenticity scales, to report proactive norms against violence within their family, and to have food and economic security. Conclusion: Despite recent advances in SGM rights and acceptance, SGM youths still face family victimization and compromised well-being. Implications: These findings underline the importance of screening for family violence among SGM youths, particularly among trans youths and those of lower socioeconomic status. Findings also underline the importance of providing SGM youth both a safe family environment and material security.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".