ArticlePCN reports : psychiatry and clinical neurosciences2022
Retrospective chart review-based assessment scale for adverse childhood events and experiences.
Article in PCN reports : psychiatry and clinical neurosciences, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Preliminary Data on Behavioral Profiles of Youth with Neurodevelopmental Disorders and Trauma.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Prevalence, type, and related factors of adverse childhood experiences among community mental health outreach users: A four-year retrospective cohort study.PCN reports : psychiatry and clinical neurosciences · 2025Article
- Retrospective chart review-based assessment scale for adverse childhood events and experiences.PCN reports : psychiatry and clinical neurosciences · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aim: Adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) are highly prevalent in the general population, and their lifelong impact on physical and mental health is profound. In assessing ACEs, it is vital to consider the pathways and modalities by which an individual internalizes events as an adverse experience and its effects on their biological, psychological, and social function. However, conventional assessments of ACEs are inadequate in that they do not comprehensively assess the source of the adverse event and the pathway and mode of its impact on the individual. Methods: This study developed an original scale for ACEs that classifies the source of the event and the pathway and mode of its impact on the individual from a retrospective review of medical charts. We also used this scale to investigate the ACEs in 536 patients with psychiatric disorders (depression, bipolar disorder, and schizophrenia). Results: This scale consisted of 28 items, and its reliability and validity were sufficient. We also found that 45.9% of the patients studied had at least one ACE, ranging from 43.5% to 51.5% for all disorders. Psychological trauma (bullying) from peers was the most common cause at 27.2%. Conclusion: We developed a retrospective chart review-based assessment tool for ACEs which enables the examination of the source of the events of ACEs and the pathways and modalities of their impact on the individual. The frequency of ACEs is high regardless of the type of psychiatric disorder, and horizontal trauma (bullying victimization) is as frequent as vertical trauma (parental maltreatment).
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.