Population attributable fractions of adolescent health and well-being outcomes associated with adverse childhood experiences in a provincially representative sample in Ontario, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
It is well known that Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACEs) are associated with poor health and well-being outcomes among adult samples. However, there are notable gaps in examining these relationships among youth. The objectives were to examine: a) the prevalence of an expanded list of ACEs among adolescents, b) ACEs sex differences, c) associations between ACEs and several adolescent health and at-risk behavioural outcomes, and d) the population attributable fractions (PAFs) for three ACE groupings (i.e., child maltreatment, household challenges, and peer victimization). Cross-sectional. Data were from the provincially-representative, cross-sectional 2014 Ontario Child Health Study (N = 6,537 dwellings, response rate = 50.8%). One randomly selected child aged 14 to 17 years old (n = 2,910) from each household was included. The majority of measures (nine ACEs and six health and well-being outcomes) were self-reported (three household challenges ACEs and physical health were collected from parents/caregivers). Descriptive statistics estimated the prevalence of ACEs for the sample and by sex. Logistic regressions tested associations between individual ACEs and seven outcomes. Population attributable fractions (PAFs) were computed for three ACE groupings with each outcome. ACEs prevalence ranged from 1.8% to 47.4% with several noted sex differences. Each ACE was associated with four or more studied outcomes. PAFs ranged from 3.5% to 47.8%, varying for each ACEs grouping. The significant associations and estimated proportions of poor adolescent outcomes attributed to ACEs indicate that identifying approaches aimed at preventing these experiences could have a substantial impact on youth health and well-being. • The majority of Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACEs) were more prevalent among girls compared to boys. • Each type of ACE was related to four or more adolescent mental health and well-being outcomes. • ACEs accounted for a substantial proportion of poor adolescent health and well-being outcomes. For example, child maltreatment and household challenges accounted for approximately 1 in 3 and nearly 1 in 2 reports of suicidal ideation, respectively. Peer victimization accounted for nearly 1 in 3 mental health disorders.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".