4.6 Article

The Impact of Attachment-Disrupting Adverse Childhood Experiences on Child Behavioral Health

期刊

JOURNAL OF PEDIATRICS
卷 221, 期 -, 页码 224-229

出版社

MOSBY-ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.jpeds.2020.03.006

关键词

-

资金

  1. Illinois Children's Healthcare Foundation
  2. UCLA National Clinician Scholars Program
  3. Kaiser Permanente Southern California

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objectives To describe patterns of overall, within-household, and community adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) among children in vulnerable neighborhoods and to identify which individual ACEs, over and above overall ACE level, predict need for behavioral health services. Study design This was a cross-sectional study that used a sample of 257 children ages 3-16 years who were seeking primary care services with co-located mental healthcare services at 1 of 2 clinics in Chicago, Illinois. The outcome variable was need for behavioral health services (Pediatric Symptom Checklist score >= 28). The independent variables were ACEs, measured with an adapted, 28-item version of the Traumatic Events Screening Inventory. Results Six ACE items were individually predictive of a clinical-range Pediatric Symptom Checklist score after adjusting for sociodemographic covariates: emotional abuse or neglect (OR 2.93, 95% CI 1.32-6.52, P < .01), natural disaster (OR 3.89, 95% CI 1.18-12.76, P = .02), forced separation from a parent or caregiver (OR 2.95, 95% CI 1.50-5.83, P < .01), incarceration of a family member (OR 2.43, 95% CI 1.20-4.93, P = .01), physical attack (OR 2.84, 95% CI 1.32-6.11, P < .01), and community violence (OR 2.35, 95% CI 1.18-4.65, P = .01). After adjusting for overall ACE level, only 1 item remained statistically significant: forced separation from a parent or caregiver (OR 2.44, 95% CI 1.19-5.01, P = .02). Conclusions ACEs that disrupt attachment relationships between children and their caregivers are a significant predictor of risk for child emotional or behavioral problems.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据