↓ Skip to main content

Childhood Maltreatment and Impulsivity: A Meta-Analysis and Recommendations for Future Study

Overview of attention for article published in Research on Child and Adolescent Psychopathology, May 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (79th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (71st percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
65 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
163 Mendeley
Title
Childhood Maltreatment and Impulsivity: A Meta-Analysis and Recommendations for Future Study
Published in
Research on Child and Adolescent Psychopathology, May 2018
DOI 10.1007/s10802-018-0445-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Richard T. Liu

Abstract

Both childhood maltreatment and impulsivity have been implicated in a broad array of negative public health outcomes and have been much studied in relation to each other. Characterizing this relationship, and the processes underlying it, are important for informing intervention efforts targeting this association and its psychopathological sequelae. The current review presented a systematic meta-analysis of the empirical literature on childhood maltreatment and impulsivity. In all, 55 eligible studies were identified and included in this review. General support was found for a positive association between childhood maltreatment, including its specific subtypes, and general trait impulsivity, with pooled effect sizes ranging from small in the case of childhood sexual abuse (OR = 1.59 [95% CI = 1.38-1.84]) to medium-to-large in the case of childhood emotional abuse (OR = 3.10 [95% CI = 2.27-4.23]). Support for a relationship between childhood maltreatment and laboratory-based measures of impulsive behavior was generally lacking. The current findings must be interpreted with a degree of caution, given several methodological limitations characterizing much of the empirical literature. Recommendations for addressing these limitations and directions for future research are provided.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 163 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 163 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 23 14%
Researcher 20 12%
Student > Master 18 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 17 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 12 7%
Other 20 12%
Unknown 53 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 49 30%
Medicine and Dentistry 16 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 6%
Neuroscience 8 5%
Social Sciences 6 4%
Other 12 7%
Unknown 63 39%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 01 July 2018.
All research outputs
#3,594,795
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Research on Child and Adolescent Psychopathology
#345
of 2,047 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#69,013
of 344,275 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Research on Child and Adolescent Psychopathology
#6
of 21 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 85th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,047 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its peers.
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 344,275 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 21 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its contemporaries.