↓ Skip to main content

Patterns of Childhood Abuse and Neglect in a Representative German Population Sample

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, July 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
36 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
111 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Patterns of Childhood Abuse and Neglect in a Representative German Population Sample
Published in
PLOS ONE, July 2016
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0159510
Pubmed ID
Authors

Christoph Schilling, Kerstin Weidner, Elmar Brähler, Heide Glaesmer, Winfried Häuser, Karin Pöhlmann

Abstract

Different types of childhood maltreatment, like emotional abuse, emotional neglect, physical abuse, physical neglect and sexual abuse are interrelated because of their co-occurrence. Different patterns of childhood abuse and neglect are associated with the degree of severity of mental disorders in adulthood. The purpose of this study was (a) to identify different patterns of childhood maltreatment in a representative German community sample, (b) to replicate the patterns of childhood neglect and abuse recently found in a clinical German sample, (c) to examine whether participants reporting exposure to specific patterns of child maltreatment would report different levels of psychological distress, and (d) to compare the results of the typological approach and the results of a cumulative risk model based on our data set. In a cross-sectional survey conducted in 2010, a representative random sample of 2504 German participants aged between 14 and 92 years completed the Childhood Trauma Questionnaire (CTQ). General anxiety and depression were assessed by standardized questionnaires (GAD-2, PHQ-2). Cluster analysis was conducted with the CTQ-subscales to identify different patterns of childhood maltreatment. Three different patterns of childhood abuse and neglect could be identified by cluster analysis. Cluster one showed low values on all CTQ-scales. Cluster two showed high values in emotional and physical neglect. Only cluster three showed high values in physical and sexual abuse. The three patterns of childhood maltreatment showed different degrees of depression (PHQ-2) and anxiety (GAD-2). Cluster one showed lowest levels of psychological distress, cluster three showed highest levels of mental distress. The results show that different types of childhood maltreatment are interrelated and can be grouped into specific patterns of childhood abuse and neglect, which are associated with differing severity of psychological distress in adulthood. The results correspond to those recently found in a German clinical sample and support a typological approach in the research of maltreatment. While cumulative risk models focus on the number of maltreatment types, the typological approach takes the number as well as the severity of the maltreatment types into account. Thus, specific patterns of maltreatment can be examined with regard to specific long-term psychological consequences.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 111 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Switzerland 1 <1%
Unknown 110 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 19 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 13%
Student > Master 14 13%
Researcher 10 9%
Other 9 8%
Other 12 11%
Unknown 33 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 37 33%
Medicine and Dentistry 12 11%
Social Sciences 4 4%
Neuroscience 4 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 3%
Other 9 8%
Unknown 42 38%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 09 September 2016.
All research outputs
#14,268,650
of 22,881,154 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#116,991
of 195,160 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#213,089
of 364,407 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#2,464
of 4,376 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,881,154 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 195,160 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.1. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 364,407 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4,376 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.