↓ Skip to main content

Child maltreatment and quality of life: a study of adolescents in residential care

Overview of attention for article published in Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, May 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (71st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
11 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
20 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
101 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
Child maltreatment and quality of life: a study of adolescents in residential care
Published in
Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, May 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12955-016-0479-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Hanne Klæboe Greger, Arne Kristian Myhre, Stian Lydersen, Thomas Jozefiak

Abstract

Childhood maltreatment is an important risk factor for mental and physical health problems. Adolescents living in residential youth care (RYC) have experienced a high rate of childhood maltreatment and are a high-risk group for psychiatric disorders. Quality of life (QoL) is a subjective, multidimensional concept that goes beyond medical diagnoses. There is a lack of research regarding the associations between childhood maltreatment and QoL. In the present study, we compare self-reported QoL between adolescents in RYC in Norway with and without maltreatment histories, and adolescents from the general population. We also study the impact of number of types of adversities on QoL. Adolescents aged 12-23 years living in RYC in Norway were invited to participate in the study; 400 participated, yielding a response rate of 67 %. Maltreatment histories were assessed through interviews with trained research assistants, and completed by 335 adolescents. Previous exposure to maltreatment was reported by 237 adolescents. The Questionnaire for Measuring Health-Related Quality of Life in Children and Adolescents (KINDL-R) was used. Nonexposed peers in RYC (n = 98) and a sample of adolescents from the general population (n = 1017) were used for comparison. General linear model analyses (ANCOVA) were conducted with five KINDL-R life domains as dependent variables. Linear regression was used to study the effect of number of types of adversities. Exposed adolescents in RYC reported poorer QoL than peers in control groups. Compared with nonexposed peers in RYC, the 95 % confidence intervals for mean score differences on the KINDL-R subdomains (0-100 scale) were 1.9-11.4 (Physical Well-being), 2.2-11.1 (Emotional Well-being), -0.7-10.0 (Self-esteem), and 1.8-10.9 (Friends). Compared with the general population sample, the 95 % confidence intervals for mean score differences were 9.7-17.6 (Physical Well-being), 7.9-15.3 (Emotional Well-being), 3.6-12.5 (Self-esteem), and 5.3-12.8 (Friends). Number of types of adversities was associated with a poorer QoL score on all subdomains (Physical- and Emotional Well-being, Self-esteem, Friends, and School). Childhood maltreatment was associated with a poorer QoL score. We suggest the use of QoL and maltreatment measures for all children and adolescents in RYC.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 11 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 101 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Mexico 1 <1%
Unknown 100 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 18 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 13%
Student > Bachelor 12 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 11 11%
Researcher 11 11%
Other 16 16%
Unknown 20 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 27 27%
Medicine and Dentistry 13 13%
Social Sciences 10 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 3%
Other 11 11%
Unknown 29 29%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 15 June 2016.
All research outputs
#4,099,721
of 15,442,255 outputs
Outputs from Health and Quality of Life Outcomes
#490
of 1,660 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#74,862
of 265,874 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Health and Quality of Life Outcomes
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 15,442,255 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,660 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% 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 265,874 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them