Association of Childhood Emotional Maltreatment with Adolescents' Psychopathology: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Mohammad HashimZainab AlimoradiAmir PakpourMonique PfaltzSameer AnsariResham AsifNaved IqbalPublished in: Trauma, violence & abuse (2024)
Childhood Emotional Maltreatment (CEM) is a significant but under-studied risk factor for impaired mental health, with adolescents being particularly susceptible. This systematic review and meta-analysis, prospectively registered in PROSPERO as CRD42022383005, aims to synthesize the findings of studies investigating the association between CEM and adolescent psychopathology, making it the first attempt to the best of our knowledge. Following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses 2020 guidelines, a comprehensive search (PubMed, Scopus, PsycINFO, Science Direct, Embase, and ProQuest) yielded 12,224 studies, from which 72 were included in the qualitative synthesis. The meta-analysis was conducted on 76 effect sizes (ranging from 0.01 to 0.57) extracted from 56 studies. The assessment of publication bias utilized funnel plots, Egger's regression test, and the trim and fill method, if required. Additionally, a predictor analysis investigated the influence of study-level variables on the CEM-psychopathology association. Results revealed a significant positive correlation between CEM and adolescent psychopathology (Pooled association: 0.24-0.41) Furthermore, assessment of publication bias indicated no significant bias. The predictor analysis suggested minimal influence of study-level variables. The study underscores the urgent need to address CEM as a crucial risk factor for adolescent psychopathology. The significant positive correlation between CEM and psychopathological outcomes highlights the detrimental effects of CEM on adolescents. Awareness, prevention efforts, and targeted interventions are essential to mitigate these effects. Further studies with culturally diverse and larger sample sizes are required, with emphasis on methodological rigor, given that most of the identified studies showed a high risk of bias.
Keyphrases