Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35232481›Full record

ArticleChild and adolescent psychiatry and mental health2022

The validity of the residuals approach to measuring resilience to adverse childhood experiences.

Stephanie Cahill, Reinmar Hager, Tarani Chandola

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Child and adolescent psychiatry and mental health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Observational
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Gender, Personality, and Cognitive Resilience Against Early-Life Disadvantage.The journals of gerontology. Series B, Psychological sciences and social sciences · 2023
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Stephanie CahillEvolution, Infection and Genomics, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK. stephanie.cahill@manchester.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2075-5510
Reinmar HagerEvolution, Infection and Genomics, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Tarani ChandolaFaculty of Humanities, Cathie Marsh Institute for Social Research, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.

Funding

Economic and Social Research Council ES/P000347/1Medical Research Council G9815508Medical Research Council MC_PC_15018Medical Research Council MC_PC_19009
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundResilience is broadly defined as the ability to maintain or regain functioning in the face of adversity. Recent work to harmonise the quantification and definition of resilience quantifies resilience as the residual variance in psychosocial functioning that remains after accounting for adversity exposure. However, there have been no published studies that have formally investigated the validity of this approach. Considering this, we examine the construct and predictive validity of the residuals approach using participants from the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children (ALSPAC), a multigenerational, longitudinal cohort study.

methodsWe regressed exposures of adolescent adversity on adolescent psychopathology scores using the Strength and Difficulties Questionnaire and obtained the residual variance. We investigated construct validity by analysing whether previously identified demographic and resilience factors significantly predicted resilience. Predictive validity of resilience was investigated by comparing the predictive power of resilience with other determinants of psychosocial functioning on two developmental outcomes: depressive symptoms at 18 years, measured by the Short Moods and Feelings Questionnaire, and NEET (Not in Employment, Education or Training) status at 17 and 23 years. The associations between depressive symptoms at 18, resilience, ACEs and covariates were tested using multiple linear regression. NEET status at 17 and 23 were run as separate binary multiple logistic regression models to test associations with resilience and known demographics previously associated with NEET status.

resultsSeven previously identified protective factors, including self-esteem, positive sibling relationship, temperament, and positive perception of school, significantly predicted resilience to adolescent psychopathology, thus providing strong construct validity. Resilience significantly predicted a reduction in depressive symptoms at 18 years, and significantly decreased the likelihood of having NEET status at both 17 years and 23 years, even after taking into account early childhood adversity and other risk factors. None of the socioeconomic factors were significantly associated with resilience.

conclusionsOur study demonstrates that the residuals method of operationalising resilience has good construct and predictive validity yet recommend replication studies. It has the potential to advance research into the mechanisms and modifiability of resilience.

trial registrationNot applicable.

Indexed as

Adverse childhood experiences, ALSPACMeasurement approachesResidualsResilience

Identifiers

PMID35232481
PMCPMC8889660

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.