Perceived emotional support mediates the association between childhood family adversity and adolescent mental health in the UK millennium cohort
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Childhood family adversity is associated with increased risk of developing mental health problems over the life course. We investigated how perceived emotional support in adolescence may mitigate the impact of childhood family adversity on adolescent mental health. We used longitudinal data from the UK Millennium Cohort Study on 9,269 children followed to age 17 years. Individuals were assigned to exposure trajectories characterised using group-based trajectory models that included measures of poverty and family dynamics up to age 14 years. Using counterfactual causal mediation analysis and four-way decomposition modelling approach, we evaluated how perceived emotional support at age 14 (measured using the three-item Short Social Provisions Scale) influences the association of childhood family adversity trajectories on mental health at ages 14 and 17, assessing the relative contributions of mediation and interaction simultaneously. Compared with children experiencing low family adversity and poverty, those exposed to childhood family adversity were almost three times more likely to experience poor mental health (RR 2·99, 95% CI 2 ·41 to 3·57) at age 14 and age 17 (RR 2·58, 95% CI 2·09 to 3·06). Perceived emotional support mitigates up to 18% (95% CI: 9% to 26%) of this effect at age 14, and 13% (95% CI: 5% to 22%) at age 17, mainly due to interactive mechanisms. Childhood family adversity has a strong effect on mental health, which is partially mitigated by emotional support in adolescence. Policies that support positive family functioning may be particularly beneficial for children who have experienced adversity.
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 | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".