Objective: Childhood maltreatment is associated with mental health problems, but the extent to which this relationship is causal remains unclear. To strengthen causal inference, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of quasi-experimental studies examining the relationship between childhood maltreatment and mental health problems. Methods:We searched PubMed, PsycINFO, and Embase for peer-reviewed, English language articles from inception until January 1, 2022. Studies were included if they examined the association between childhood maltreatment and mental health problems using a quasiexperimental method (e.g., twin/sibling differences design, Children of Twins design, adoption design, fixed-effects design, random-intercept cross-lagged panel model, natural experiment, propensity score matching, or inverse probability weighting). Results:We identified 34 quasi-experimental studies, including 54,646 independent participants. Before quasi-experimental adjustment for confounding, childhood maltreatment was moderately associated with mental health problems (Cohen's d=0.56, 95% CI=0.41-0.71).Following quasi-experimental adjustment, a small association between childhood maltreatment and mental health problems remained (Cohen's d=0.31,. This adjusted association between child maltreatment and mental health was consistent across different quasi-experimental methods, and generalised across different psychiatric disorders. Conclusion:These findings are consistent with a small, causal contribution of childhood maltreatment to mental health problems. Furthermore, the findings suggest that part of the overall risk of mental health problems in individuals exposed to maltreatment is due to wider genetic and environmental risk factors. Therefore, preventing childhood maltreatment and addressing wider psychiatric risk factors in individuals exposed to maltreatment could help to prevent psychopathology.
IntroductionDisruptive behaviour disorders, including oppositional defiant disorder and conduct disorder, are a common set of diagnoses in childhood and adolescence, with global estimates of 5.7%, 3.6% and 2.1% for any disruptive disorder, oppositional defiant disorder and conduct disorder, respectively. There are high economic and social costs associated with disruptive behaviours and the prevalence of these disorders has increased in recent years. As such, disruptive behaviours represent an escalating major public health concern and it is important to understand what factors may influence the risk of these behaviours. Such research would inform interventions that aim to prevent the development of disruptive behaviours. The current review will identify the most stringent evidence of putative risk factors for disruptive behaviour from quasi-experimental studies, which enable stronger causal inference.Methods and analysisThe review will be carried out according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. An electronic search of references published between 1 January 1980 and 1 March 2020 will be conducted using Medline, Embase, PsycINFO and Web of Science. Initial abstract and title screening, full-text screening and data extraction will be completed independently by two reviewers using Evidence for Policy and Practice Information (EPPI)-Reviewer 4 software. Quasi-experimental studies in the English language examining the association between any putative risk factor and a clearly defined measure of disruptive behaviour (eg, a validated questionnaire measure) will be included. We will conduct meta-analyses if we can pool a minimum of three similar studies with the same or similar exposures and outcomes.Ethics and disseminationThe proposed review does not require ethical approval. The results will help to identify risk factors for which there is strong evidence of causal effects on disruptive behaviours and also highlight potential risk factors that require further research. The findings will be disseminated via publication in a peer-reviewed scientific journal and through presentations at international meetings and conferences.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42020169313.
Background:Positive self-bias is thought to be protective for mental health. We previously found that the degree of positive bias when learning self-referential social evaluation decreases with increasing social anxiety. It is unclear whether this reduction is driven by differences in state or trait anxiety, as both are elevated in social anxiety; therefore, we examined the effects on the state of anxiety induced by the 7.5% carbon dioxide (CO2) inhalation model of generalised anxiety disorder (GAD) on social evaluation learning.Methods:For our study, 48 (24 of female gender) healthy volunteers took two inhalations (medical air and 7.5% CO2, counterbalanced) whilst learning social rules (self-like, self-dislike, other-like and other-dislike) in an instrumental social evaluation learning task. We analysed the outcomes (number of positive responses and errors to criterion) using the random effects Poisson regression.Results:Participants made fewer and more positive responses when breathing 7.5% CO2 in the other-like and other-dislike rules, respectively (gas × condition × rule interaction p = 0.03). Individuals made fewer errors learning self-like than self-dislike, and this positive self-bias was unaffected by CO2. Breathing 7.5% CO2 increased errors, but only in the other-referential rules (gas × condition × rule interaction p = 0.003).Conclusions:Positive self-bias (i.e. fewer errors learning self-like than self-dislike) seemed robust to changes in state anxiety. In contrast, learning other-referential evaluation was impaired as state anxiety increased. This suggested that the previously observed variations in self-bias arise due to trait, rather than state, characteristics.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.