Exploring the Relationship Between Parental Trauma, Parenting Style, and Children’s Medical Treatment Adherence: A Cross-Sectional Study (Preprint)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Medication adherence is defined as the degree to which the medications taken reflect the prescribed intention and is influenced by various factors. Different factors, such as parental trauma or parenting style, may influence their child or children's medical treatment adherence. Authoritative, or "flexible," parenting is known to develop the most nurturing relationship between parent and child or children. The relationship between parental factors, such as parenting style and trauma level, and their influence on child medication adherence is being explored. Objective: This study examines the relationship between parental trauma, parenting style, and their child or children's adherence to medical recommendations. Methods: Participants were recruited through Amazon's Mechanical Turk, an online crowdsourcing platform. Participants were aged 18 years or older, a caregiver for at least 1 child younger than the age of 18 years, and had at least 1 child who was prescribed medication within the past 3 months. Parental trauma level was measured via the Adverse Childhood Experiences Questionnaire, and parenting style was measured via the Parental Authority Questionnaire-Revised. Descriptive statistics, including chi-square tests, 2-tailed t tests, and adjusted logistic regressions, were used to determine the association between parental trauma, parenting style, and their child or children's medical adherence. Results: A total of 720 participant responses were analyzed. Children who were medically adherent were younger (P=.02). Caregivers' mean age was 36.8 (SD 7.97) years, and 35.4% (n=255) identified as male. An increase in caregivers' adverse childhood experiences score was marginally associated with an increased risk of medication nonadherence among their children (adjusted odds ratio 0.94; P=.07). Conclusions: Similar to other studies, this study showed that parents of children who adhere to medical treatment practice an authoritative parenting style. Uniquely, it also showed that an increased adverse childhood experiences score was only marginally associated with an increased risk of medical nonadherence.
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 | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".