Adverse childhood experiences
Evaluation Table
Full citation of selected article
Article #1
Article #2
Article #3
Article #4
Mckelvey, L. M., Edge, N. A., Fitzgerald, S., Kraleti, S., & Whiteside-Mansell, L. (2017). Adverse childhood experiences: Screening and health in children from birth to age 5. Families, Systems, & Health, 35(4), 420-429. doi:10.1037/fsh0000301
Melville, A. (2017). Adverse Childhood Experiences from Ages 0–2 and Young Adult Health: Implications for Preventive Screening and Early Intervention. Journal of Child & Adolescent Trauma, 10(3), 207-215. doi:10.1007/s40653-017-0161-0
Schofield, T. J., Donnellan, M. B., Merrick, M. T., Ports, K. A., Klevens, J., & Leeb, R. (2018). Intergenerational Continuity in Adverse Childhood Experiences and Rural Community Environments. American Journal of Public Health, 108(9), 1148-1152. doi:10.2105/ajph.2018.304598
Zare, M., Narayan, M., Lasway, A., Kitsantas, P., Wojtusiak, J., & Oetjen, C.A. (2018). Influence of adverse childhood experiences on anxiety and depression in children aged 6 to 11 years. Pediatric Nursing, 44(6), 267-274, 287.
Conceptual Framework
Describe the theoretical basis for the study
Childhood toxic stress, precipitated by ACEs, is associated with biological changes in the developing brain and body that affect concurrent and long-term health and behavior.
Exposure to adversity, such as trauma, neglect, and abuse, in childhood has been identified as a major global public health issue. I chose this article because it focused on the assessment of ACEs that occurred in the early development of children. It explored the short and long-term impacts of childhood adversity during specific developmental periods, such as infancy and toddlerhood.
ACEs show intergenerational continuity and their impact on health and well-being can be repeated across generations. I chose this research article because it focused on reducing or preventing ACEs and its potential to produce long-lasting benefits in both the physical/mental health and quality of life across generations. How effective is breaking the chain in a long history of trauma and other childhood adversities?
I chose this last research article because it examined the association of adverse childhood experiences with depression and anxiety in children aged 6 to 11 years old. The article explains that when children experience prolonged stressors such as ACEs, both a chemical and physical change can occur which can alter the neural pathways and the metabolic processes. This can lead to lifelong issues both with mental health and chronic illnesses.
Design/Method Describe the design
and how the study
was carried out
The survey asked all respondents the same questions in the same order to allow for statistical analysis. The survey gathered a narrow amount of information, 10 yes or no questions, from a large number of respondents. All of the questions were closed questions for quantification in order to be coded and processed quickly.
This study used data collected for the evaluation of voluntary home visiting services funded through the Maternal, Infant, and Early Childhood Home Visiting (MIECHV) program in the state of Arkansas.
This study examined whether there is evidence to support a screening approach that assesses children’s current exposures to risks that act as precursors for ACEs, measured in a way that falls below a threshold of explicit abuse, neglect, or illegal behavior.
Mixed-methods research- The study examined the relationship between ACEs measured from age 0–2 and adult health outcomes using data from the Longitudinal Studies of Child Abuse and Neglect (LONGSCAN) dataset which pull data from five national data collection sites. The data included past ACE scores as well as CPS reports and self-proclaimed adverse childhood experiences.
Quantitative research – During each assessment period, professional interviewers made home visits to each family for approximately 2 hours on 2 occasions. At each visit, father, mother, and adolescent independently completed a set of questionnaires in separate rooms covering an array of topics related to work, finances, school, family life, mental and physical health status, and social relationships.
Quantitative research – This article used data already collected by the National Survey of Children’s Health (NSCH).
The NSCH collected interviews randomly all over the US of 95,677 children. This article took those surveys that applied to children aged 6-7 which included 31,060 children. The article focused further on only depression and anxiety relevant answers. Coding the answer as no or yes. Then that data was correlated with ACEs scores received from the same survey.
Sample/Setting
The number and
characteristics of
patients,
attrition rate, etc.
2,004 participants
Families were eligible for services if they reported at least one of the following risks: low income (250% of federal poverty), homelessness, single and/or teen (aged 19 or younger) parent(s), parent mental illness, substance abuse, incarceration, military deployment, disability, suspected child maltreatment (based on referrals from child-protective services), child developmental delay, preterm/low-birth weight, or chronic illness.
139 participants
Child Maltreatment Physical Abuse 17.4% (24), Emotional Abuse 8% (11), Physical Neglect 8.7% (12), Household Dysfunction Caregiver mental illness 35.5% (49), Substance use 34.8% (48), Caregiver treated violently 40.3% (60), Criminal household member 3.6% (5), Caregiver separation/divorce 11.6% (16).
451 two-parent families via telephone through the cohort of all seventh-grade students (aged 12–13 years) in 8 counties in north central Iowa who were enrolled in public or private schools during winter and spring of 1989. An additional criterion for inclusion in the study was the presence of a sibling within 4 years of age of the focal seventh grader. Seventy-seven percent of the eligible families agreed to participate in the study. We first conducted interviews in 1989 with adolescents (G2) and their parents (G1) when they were in seventh grade.
The NSCH was conducted using telephone numbers that were dialed at random to identify households with children under 18 years old. In total, interviewers contacted 847,881 households, of which 87,422 households had age-eligible children, and interviews were completed on 95,677 children. The sample for the analysis included only children between the ages of 6 and 11 years. This subsample included 31,060 children.
Major Variables Studied
List and define dependent and independent variables
Demographic controls and family resources scale scores. Below poverty line. Primary caregivers were 28 years of age (range = 13–74), White (60%), and had a high school education or less (61%). Children were 32 months of age (range = 13–76 months) and approximately half (51%) were male.
ACEs Measured early childhood ACE categories of child maltreatment were physical abuse, emotional abuse, and physical neglect. Household dysfunction was measured by caregiver mental illness, caregiver treated violently, incarceration, substance abuse, and parental separation or divorce. Traditional ACE categories of sexual abuse and emotional neglect were not measured due to limited variance of available data
ACEs items included indicators of abuse (physical, sexual, emotional), emotional neglect, and other household challenges (parent treated violently by spouse, household substance abuse, household mental illness, and parental separation or divorce). Community characteristics (block group level) Low socioeconomic status 6.42 (3.07), Population density (people per mi2) 227.93 (493.49), Perceived lack of community services (scale 1–4) 3.09 (0.29), Perceived community social cohesion (scale 1–4) 3.00 (0.27), Alcohol vendor density (vendors per km2) 4.13 (7.76)
outcome variable, namely depression and/or anxiety.
Sociodemographic variables included race/ethnicity (Hispanic, White non-Hispanic, Black non-Hispanic, and Other; “Other” includes Asian, Ameri can Indian, Native Alaskan, Native Hawaiian, Other Pacific Islander and multi-racial children), family structure (two biological parents, parent and step-parent, single mother-no father, other family type), sex (male, female), and poverty level (0% to 99% Federal Poverty Level (FPL), 100% to 199% FPL, 200% to 399% FPL, 400% FPL or
