ArticleChild abuse & neglect2025
Does the timing matter? The association between childhood adversity and internalizing and externalizing problems from childhood to adolescence and its sex differences.
Article in Child abuse & neglect, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Shaping personality functioning: type and timing effects of childhood maltreatment on personality functioning.European child & adolescent psychiatry · 2026Article
- Association of duration and timing of household dysfunction with aggression: A Taiwan birth cohort study.European child & adolescent psychiatry · 2026Article
- Association of early life adversity with internalizing and externalizing behavior across 3 low- and middle-income countries.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2025Article
- Distinctions in buffering and exacerbating associations between parent and peer relationship quality and adolescents' psychopathology based on maltreatment status.Development and psychopathology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundChildhood adversity (CA) is a well-known risk factor for mental distress, and its impacts may vary depending on its timing. However, relevant empirical studies are rare and ambiguous. Similarly, prior studies have given little attention to possible moderating effects by sex, particularly in the context of developmental stages.
objectiveThis study sought to identify when the impacts of CA on children's mental health become pronounced and the extent to which these relations and sensitive timing vary by gender. PARTICIPANTS AND
settingData were from the Young Women and Child Development Study (n = 360), covering ages 4.3 to 17.6.
methodsTime-varying effect models, including moderation by child gender, were evaluated.
resultsThe effect of CA on mental health surged during middle childhood (b = 0.93 at age 10 and 1.94 at age 9 for internalizing and externalizing problems, respectively) and peaked at age 15 (b = 2.35 and 3.53 for internalizing and externalizing problems, respectively). Gender interaction findings suggest that gender moderation effects were limited to between ages 10.3 (b = 0.88) and 14.3 (b = 1.11) for internalizing problems and between ages 5.3 (b = 1.06) and 7.0 (b = 1.31) for externalizing problems. For girls, the influence began escalating at an earlier age.
conclusionsMiddle childhood and early adolescence should be considered key intervention points to prevent CA from worsening children's mental health. Intervention timing should be tailored by gender to effectively disrupt the impacts of childhood adversity on mental health.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.