Skip to main content
NCBI home page
Canadian Journal of Psychiatry. Revue Canadienne de Psychiatrie logoLink to Canadian Journal of Psychiatry. Revue Canadienne de Psychiatrie
. 2016 Jul 9;61(12):776–788. doi: 10.1177/0706743716651832

Individual- and Relationship-Level Factors Related to Better Mental Health Outcomes following Child Abuse: Results from a Nationally Representative Canadian Sample

Facteurs individuels et relationnels liés à de meilleurs résultats de santé mentale suite à la violence faite aux enfants : résultats d’un échantillon national canadien représentatif

Tracie O Afifi 1,2,✉, Harriet L MacMillan 3,4, Tamara Taillieu 5, Sarah Turner 1, Kristene Cheung 6, Jitender Sareen 1,2,6, Michael H Boyle 3
PMCID: PMC5564893  PMID: 27310246

Abstract

Objective:

Child abuse can have devastating mental health consequences. Fortunately, not all individuals exposed to child abuse will suffer from poor mental health. Understanding what factors are related to good mental health following child abuse can provide evidence to inform prevention of impairment. Our objectives were to 1) describe the prevalence of good, moderate, and poor mental health among respondents with and without a child abuse history; 2) examine the relationships between child abuse and good, moderate, and poor mental health outcomes; 3) examine the relationships between individual- and relationship-level factors and better mental health outcomes; and 4) determine if individual- and relationship-level factors moderate the relationship between child abuse and mental health.

Method:

Data were from the nationally representative 2012 Canadian Community Health Survey: Mental Health (n = 23,395; household response rate = 79.8%; 18 years and older). Good, moderate, and poor mental health was assessed using current functioning and well-being, past-year mental disorders, and past-year suicidal ideation.

Results:

Only 56.3% of respondents with a child abuse history report good mental health compared to 72.4% of those without a child abuse history. Individual- and relationship-level factors associated with better mental health included higher education and income, physical activity, good coping skills to handle problems and daily demands, and supportive relationships that foster attachment, guidance, reliable alliance, social integration, and reassurance of worth.

Conclusions:

This study identifies several individual- and relationship-level factors that could be targeted for intervention strategies aimed at improving mental health outcomes following child abuse.

Keywords: child abuse, mental health, mental disorders, well-being, functioning, suicidal ideation, resilience, intervention, coping, physical activity

Approximately 32% of Canadian adults indicate that they have experienced physical abuse, sexual abuse, and/or exposure to intimate partner violence (IPV) in childhood.1 A large proportion of child maltreatment research, including abuse and neglect, has focused on risk factors and associated maladaptive outcomes. Being maltreated as a child can have devastating consequences and is linked to poor academic performance,2 mental disorders,1,3–11 poor psychological well-being,12,13 physical health problems,2,14–17 aggression,2 crime,2 violence,2,18 suicidal behaviour,1,19 and decreased quality of life.2,20 Collectively, this literature indicates that child maltreatment is associated with significant impairment. Fortunately, not all children exposed to maltreatment experience poor health and developmental outcomes; some children appear to be more resilient.

Mental health is defined by the World Health Organization (WHO) as not just the absence of mental disorders, but also the presence of well-being.21 This perspective on mental health has been further developed in the work of Corey Keyes and the complete state mental health model.22–24 Keyes states that the absence of mental disorders does not equal mental health, well-being, or happiness, but rather mental health is best understood as complete mental health, including the absence of mental disorders and the presence of mental well-being and functioning.22,25 According to Keyes,26 well-being and functioning include constructs such as happiness, interest and satisfaction with life, being embedded in a community, and confidence in managing daily responsibilities, expressing ideas, and making worthwhile contributions to society. Similarly, it may be important to expand our thinking beyond mental disorders and also include suicidal thoughts. Thinking about suicide is an important indicator of distress. Having a mental disorder increases the odds of suicidal ideation, but it is also possible to have such thoughts without meeting criteria for a mental disorder.27 Importantly, some individuals may not have mental disorders or suicidal thoughts but still report poor mental well-being and functioning, while others may have mental disorders or suicidal thoughts but report good mental well-being and functioning. Positive mental health has been conceptualized as a state of well-being that can be improved even if an individual experiences a mental disorder.28,29 This illustrates the importance of expanding our understanding of mental health beyond the presence or absence of mental disorders and acknowledges that mental health can change over time. The concepts of mental disorder, suicidal ideation, and well-being can be combined to create a spectrum ranging from good mental health (the presence of positive well-being without mental disorder or suicidal ideation) to poor mental health (the absence of well-being and the presence of mental disorder and/or suicidal ideation). Previous research has shown that most Canadians have flourishing well-being, and of those individuals, relatively few experience a mental disorder.30 Presently, gaps in knowledge exist in our understanding of which factors are associated with better mental health outcomes among individuals exposed to child maltreatment.

Only a small literature has focused on better mental health outcomes following child maltreatment. Studies have found that individual-level personality factors and family-level factors such as locus of control,31,32 self-esteem,33,34 and stable family environment or parental support35–39 are related to better mental health outcomes. Numerous other factors that are amendable have not received sufficient attention in the current literature. Understanding what factors are related to good mental health following child maltreatment may help inform intervention strategies.

To date, research examining factors related to better mental health outcomes among child maltreatment survivors is limited by narrow measurements of both mental health and child maltreatment, the inclusion of only a few potential protective factors, the use of nonrepresentative clinical or at-risk samples, small sample sizes, and the absence of a nonmaltreated comparison group.40 The current study addresses many of these limitations. The individual- and relationship-level factors included in this article have not been adequately examined in earlier work and were selected based on knowledge of the literature and factors that are amenable to change.

The overall objectives of the current study are to 1) describe the prevalence of good, moderate, and poor mental health among respondents with and without a child abuse history; 2) examine the relationships between child abuse and good, moderate, and poor mental health outcomes; 3) examine the relationships between individual- and relationship-level factors and better mental health outcomes among respondents with and without a child abuse history; and 4) determine if sociodemographic characteristics and individual- and relationship-level factors moderate the relationship between child abuse and mental health.

Methods

Data and Sample

Data were from the Canadian Community Health Survey–Mental Health (CCHS-2012) collected by Statistics Canada in 2012. The CCHS-2012 is a cross-sectional representative sample of Canadians aged 15 years and older living in the 10 provinces (N = 25,113). The CCHS-2012 sampling frame excluded the following: residents in the 3 territories, members of Indigenous communities, full-time members of the Canadian Armed Forces, and institutionalized persons (collectively less than 3% of the Canadian population in 2013).41 The CCHS-2012 was implemented using a multistage, stratified cluster design. Trained lay interviewers conducted the interviews using computer-assisted interviewing. The overall household-level response rate was 79.8%. The combined individual- and household-level response rate was 68.9%.41 Only survey participants 18 years and older were asked the child abuse questions, resulting in a final sample size of 23,395. The survey was voluntary, and participants’ privacy and confidentiality were ensured under the Statistics Act.42

Measurements

Child abuse

Physical abuse and exposure to IPV (perpetrated by an adult) that occurred in the home before the age of 16 years were assessed in the survey based on items from the Childhood Experiences of Violence Questionnaire.43 Dichotomous coding (yes/no) was used based on empirically derived cut-offs. Physical abuse was defined as present if the respondent reported 1) being slapped on the face, head, or ears or hit or spanked with something hard (3 times or more); 2) being pushed, grabbed, shoved, or having something thrown at the respondent to hurt them (3 times or more); and/or 3) being kicked, bit, punched, choked, burned, or physically attacked (1 time or more). Exposure to IPV was defined as present if the respondent reported having seen or heard parents, stepparents, or guardians hitting each other or another adult in the home (3 times or more). Sexual abuse was defined as present if the respondent reported 1) being attempted or forced into unwanted sexual activity by being threatened, held down, or hurt in some way (1 time or more) and/or 2) was sexually touched, including unwanted touching or grabbing, kissing, or fondling against the respondent’s will (1 time or more). A dichotomous any child abuse variable (yes/no) was also computed based on whether the respondent reported experiencing 1 or more of the 3 types of child abuse assessed in the survey. A count variable was also computed to indicate experiencing 0, 1, 2, or 3 types of child abuse.

Mental health indicators

Positive functioning and emotional well-being

The 14-item Mental Health Continuum–Short Form (MHC-SF) based on the work of Keyes was used to assess psychological, social, and emotional functioning and well-being.25,44–46 We applied the algorithms developed by Keyes for use with this measure to place participants into 1 of 3 mental health status categories: flourishing mental health (high positive functioning and high emotional well-being), moderate mental health (high positive functioning and low emotional well-being or low positive functioning and high emotional well-being), and languishing mental health (low positive functioning and low emotional well-being).

Mental disorders and conditions

Several past-year mental disorders were assessed using the World Health Organization version of the Composite International Diagnostic Interview (WHO-CIDI) and based on fourth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-IV) criteria.47,48 The specific mental disorders included depression, bipolar disorder, generalized anxiety disorder, alcohol abuse or dependence, and drug abuse or dependence. Additional mental conditions were assessed using self-reports by asking the respondents if they have a long-term health condition diagnosed by a health professional that had lasted or was expected to last 6 months or more. Self-reported mental conditions included obsessive-compulsive disorder, posttraumatic stress disorder, panic disorder, phobia, learning disability, attention-deficit disorder, and eating disorder. Participants were coded as having a past-year mental condition if they met CIDI diagnostic criteria for a mental disorder and/or reported any one of the self-reported mental health conditions.

Suicidal ideation

Suicidal ideation was assessed with a question asking respondents if in the past 12 months they had ever seriously thought about committing suicide or taking their own life (yes or no).

Overall mental health

Three categories of good, moderate, and poor mental health were computed using current positive functioning and emotional well-being, past-year mental disorders, and past-year suicide ideation: good mental health (flourishing mental health, no mental disorder, and no suicide ideation), moderate mental health (flourishing mental health, past-year mental disorder, and no suicide ideation or moderate mental health with or without a past-year mental disorder but no suicide ideation), or poor mental health (any participant reporting languishing mental health or past-year suicide ideation) (see Table 1). This 3-factor model has been empirically supported.46,49–52

Table 1.

Three-Factor Model for Computing Mental Health.

No Past-Year Suicidal Ideation Past-Year Suicidal Ideation
Scores on MHC-SF22–25 No Past-Year Mental Disorder Past-Year Mental Disorder No Past-Year Mental Disorder Past-Year Mental Disorder
Flourishing Good Mental Health Moderate Mental Health Poor Mental Health Poor Mental Health
Moderate Moderate Mental Health Moderate Mental Health Poor Mental Health Poor Mental Health
Languishing Poor Mental Health Poor Mental Health Poor Mental Health Poor Mental Health
Open in a new tab

Individual- and relationship-level factors

Individual- and relationship-level factors included physical health conditions, physical activity, coping skills, and relationships with friends and family. Respondents were asked if they have a long-term health condition diagnosed by a health professional that had lasted, or was expected to last, 6 months or more, including asthma; arthritis; back problems; high blood pressure; migraine headaches; chronic bronchitis, emphysema, or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease; diabetes; epilepsy; heart disease; cancer; stroke; bowel disease; or chronic fatigue syndrome. Level of physical activity was based on the respondents’ response to a question asking whether they had engaged in moderate to vigorous physical activity in the past 7 days (yes/no). Positive coping skills were assessed using 2 items rated on a 5-point scale ranging from excellent to poor: 1) their ability to handle unexpected and difficult problems (e.g., a family or personal crisis) and 2) their ability to handle the day-to-day demands of their life (e.g., handling work, family, and volunteer responsibilities). Dichotomous coding was used to categorize participants on these 2 items (poor/fair ability or good/very good/excellent ability). Relationship-level factors included assessments of the respondents’ quality of relationships with family and friends based on the 10-item Social Provisions Scale,48,53–55 which was designed to assess the degree to which participants’ social relationships provide various dimensions of support. The following subscales were included in the analyses: attachment, guidance, social integration, reliable alliance, and reassurance of worth, with higher scores indicating greater support.

Sociodemographic characteristics

Sex and age were included as sociodemographic covariates in multivariable models. Education, income, and marital status were included as important sociodemographic characteristics that may be related to mental health outcomes and in some cases are amendable to change.

Statistical Analysis

Statistical weights were applied to ensure that the data were representative of the Canadian general population. To address the complex survey design, bootstrapping was performed as a variance estimation technique. First, the prevalence or mean scores of sociodemographic covariates and individual- and relationship-level factors by the different mental health status indicators (i.e., well-being and functioning, past-year mental conditions, and past-year suicide ideation) were computed. Second, the distribution of child abuse by well-being and functioning, mental conditions, and suicidal ideation were examined using cross-tabulations and logistic regression models. Third, multinomial regression models were used to examine the association between individual- and relationship-level factors on better overall mental health outcomes stratified by those with and without a child abuse history. Multinomial models adjusted for sex and age. Finally, interaction terms were examined to determine whether the associations between sociodemographic characteristics (i.e., education, income, and marital status) and individual- and relationship-level factors moderated the relationship between child abuse and overall mental health outcomes.

Results

For past-month well-being and functioning, 76.8% of the sample reported flourishing, 21.6% reported were moderate, and 1.5% were languishing. Sixteen percent reported a past-year mental health condition and 3.2% reported past-year suicidal ideation. Based on the mutually exclusive overall mental health categories (Table 1), 67.1% of the sample had good mental health, 28.6% had moderate mental health, and 4.3% had poor mental health. When examining overall mental health stratified by child abuse history, only 56% of respondents with a child abuse history reported good mental health compared to 72.4% of those without a child abuse history. As well, among respondents with a child abuse history, 35.6% and 8.1% reported moderate and poor mental health, respectively. Table 2 summarizes the distribution of the sociodemographic characteristics and individual- and relationship-level factors by the 3 individual mental health indicators.

Table 2.

Sociodemographic Covariates and Individual- and Relationship-Level Factors by Mental Health Indicators of Past 12-Month Well-Being and Functioning, Past-Year Mental Conditions, and Past-Year Suicidal Ideation in the General Canadian Population.

Mental Health Indicators
Keyes’s Well-Being and Functioning Mental Condition Suicidal Ideation
Covariates Flourishing Moderate Languishing No Yes No Yes
Sociodemographic variables
 Sex
  Male 76.87 (75.57, 78.11) 21.55 (20.33, 22.83) 1.58 (1.31, 1.91) 83.11 (81.92, 84.23) 16.89 (15.77, 18.08) 96.89 (96.38, 97.33) 3.11 (2.67, 3.62)
  Female 76.74 (75.51, 77.93) 21.79 (20.64, 22.98) 1.47 (1.18, 1.83) 84.80 (83.74, 85.81) 15.20 (14.19, 16.26) 96.78 (96.24, 97.25) 3.22 (2.75, 3.76)
 Age, y
  18-34 73.76 (71.92, 75.52) 24.92 (23.20, 26.72) 1.32 (0.99, 1.76) 75.42 (73.55, 77.20) 24.58 (22.80, 26.45) 95.63 (94.68, 96.41) 4.37 (3.59, 5.32)
  35-49 76.24 (74.39, 77.99) 22.17 (20.46, 23.98) 1.59 (1.14, 2.21) 83.47 (81.85, 84.97) 16.53 (15.03, 18.15) 96.59 (95.73, 97.29) 3.41 (2.71, 4.27)
  50-64 78.27 (76.46, 79.99) 20.02 (18.39, 21.76) 1.70 (1.30, 2.23) 87.49 (86.21, 88.66) 12.51 (11.34, 13.79) 97.11 (96.50, 97.62) 2.89 (2.38, 3.50)
  65 and older 80.21 (78.78, 81.58) 18.31 (16.94, 19.75) 1.48 (1.12, 1.96) 93.12 (92.19, 93.94) 6.88 (6.06, 7.81) 98.66 (98.24, 98.98) 1.34 (1.02, 1.76)
 Education
  Less than high school 74.05 (71.68, 76.29) 23.65 (21.48, 25.97) 2.29 (1.75, 3.00) 81.53 (79.25, 83.62) 18.47 (16.38, 20.75) 95.63 (94.40, 96.60) 4.37 (3.40, 5.60)
  High school 75.54 (73.39, 77.57) 22.83 (20.82, 24.98) 1.63 (1.17, 2.25) 82.17 (80.30, 83.90) 17.83 (16.10, 19.70) 96.83 (95.98, 97.51) 3.17 (2.49, 4.02)
  Some postsecondary 73.74 (70.09, 77.08) 24.55 (21.32, 28.10) 1.71 (1.06, 2.76) 76.58 (72.88, 79.92) 23.42 (20.08, 27.12) 96.24 (94.89, 97.24) 3.76 (2.76, 5.11)
  Trade/college/university certificate/diploma 77.39 (75.97, 78.74) 20.93 (19.60, 22.32) 1.68 (1.32, 2.15) 83.92 (82.66, 85.11) 16.08 (14.89, 17.34) 96.79 (96.26, 97.25) 3.21 (2.75, 3.74)
  University degree 79.36 (77.48, 81.12) 20.03 (18.25, 21.93) 0.61 (0.41, 0.91) 88.86 (87.40, 90.17) 11.14 (9.83, 12.60) 97.84 (96.79, 98.55) 2.16 (1.45, 3.21)
 Income
  Less than $30,000 70.40 (68.33, 72.39) 26.11 (24.26, 28.05) 3.49 (2.84, 4.28) 76.87 (75.04, 78.61) 23.13 (21.39, 24.96) 94.34 (93.38, 95.17) 5.66 (4.83, 6.62)
  $30,000-$49,999 74.66 (72.55, 76.67) 23.60 (21.60, 25.72) 1.74 (1.24, 2.43) 82.70 (80.82, 84.43) 17.30 (15.57, 19.18) 96.28 (94.95, 97.28) 3.72 (2.72, 5.05)
  $50,000-$79,999 76.76 (74.93, 78.50) 21.86 (20.16, 23.65) 1.38 (0.98, 1.95) 85.09 (83.50, 86.55) 14.91 (13.45, 16.50) 97.02 (96.25, 97.64) 2.98 (2.36, 3.75)
  $80,000 or more 80.53 (79.07, 81.91) 18.79 (17.43, 20.22) 0.68 (0.47, 0.99) 86.81 (85.57, 87.96) 13.19 (12.04, 14.43) 98.03 (97.55, 98.42) 1.97 (1.58, 2.45)
 Marital status
  Separated/divorced/widowed 74.41 (72.07, 76.62) 23.19 (21.05, 25.48) 2.40 (1.85, 3.10) 84.91 (82.98, 86.66) 15.09 (13.34, 17.02) 96.16 (94.65, 97.25) 3.84 (2.75, 5.35)
  Never married 70.57 (68.70, 72.37) 27.03 (25.27, 28.87) 2.40 (1.95, 2.95) 72.41 (70.19, 74.52) 27.59 (25.48, 29.81) 94.76 (93.93, 95.49) 5.24 (4.51, 6.07)
  Married/common-law 79.62 (78.48, 80.70) 19.37 (18.32, 20.47) 1.01 (0.79, 1.30) 88.09 (87.13, 88.98) 11.91 (11.02, 12.87) 97.74 (97.31, 98.10) 2.26 (1.90, 2.69)
Physical health
 Any physical health condition
  Yes 75.49 (74.28, 76.66) 22.56 (21.46, 23.70) 1.95 (1.66, 2.29) 81.47 (80.42, 82.47) 18.53 (17.53, 19.58) 95.96 (95.38, 96.46) 4.04 (3.54, 4.62)
  No 78.45 (77.08, 79.75) 20.54 (19.24, 21.90) 1.01 (0.76, 1.35) 87.00 (85.84, 88.07) 13.00 (11.93, 14.16) 97.89 (97.45, 98.26) 2.11 (1.74, 2.55)
 Moderate/vigorous physical activity  (past week)
  No 72.47 (70.71, 74.16) 24.44 (22.86, 26.09) 3.09 (2.53, 3.77) 83.77 (82.38, 85.08) 16.23 (14.92, 17.62) 96.37 (95.72, 96.92) 3.63 (3.08, 4.28)
  Yes 78.43 (77.34, 79.49) 20.64 (19.61, 21.70) 0.93 (0.75, 1.15) 84.05 (83.11, 84.95) 15.95 (15.05, 16.89) 97.01 (96.56, 97.40) 2.99 (2.60, 3.44)
Positive coping skills
 Handle unexpected problems
  Poor/fair 44.91 (41.76, 48.09) 47.38 (44.15, 50.64) 7.71 (6.44, 9.21) 59.64 (56.34, 62.85) 40.36 (37.15, 43.66) 89.77 (87.92, 91.37) 10.23 (8.63, 12.08)
  Good/very good/excellent 80.47 (79.60, 81.31) 18.71 (17.89, 19.56) 0.82 (0.66, 1.02) 86.74 (85.96, 87.49) 13.26 (12.51, 14.04) 97.64 (97.28, 97.95) 2.36 (2.05, 2.72)
 Handle day-to-day demands
  Poor/fair 33.58 (30.15, 37.18) 52.19 (48.27, 56.07) 14.24 (11.78, 17.12) 51.94 (48.06, 55.79) 48.06 (44.21, 51.94) 86.12 (83.55, 88.35) 13.88 (11.65, 16.45)
  Good/very good/excellent 79.33 (78.48, 80.21) 19.88 (19.03, 20.77) 0.79 (0.64, 0.97) 85.82 (85.02, 86.57) 14.18 (13.43, 14.98) 97.45 (97.09, 97.76) 2.55 (2.24, 2.91)
Quality of relationships with family and friends, mean (SE)
 Attachment (2-8) 7.40 (.012) 6.88 (.019) 5.60 (.119) 7.31 (.012) 7.02 (.027) 7.29 (.011) 6.56 (.076)
 Guidance (2-8) 7.45 (.012) 6.91 (.023) 5.65 (.123) 7.36 (.012) 7.08 (.028) 7.33 (.011) 6.55 (.080)
 Reliable alliance (2-8) 7.47 (.012) 7.04 (.021) 6.08 (.105) 7.40 (.011) 7.16 (.025) 7.38 (.010) 6.70 (.072)
 Social integration (2-8) 7.18 (.012) 6.45 (.023) 4.97 (.130) 7.07 (.013) 6.62 (.032) 7.02 (.012) 6.15 (.070)
 Reassurance of worth (2-8) 7.19 (.012) 6.51 (.022) 5.38 (.110) 7.08 (.013) 6.75 (.029) 7.05 (.012) 6.28 (.074)
Open in a new tab

Notes. Values are presented as % (95% confidence interval) unless otherwise indicated. Percentages and means are based on weighted N. Mental health indicators are not mutually exclusive.

Table 3 reports the distribution and associations of child abuse types and each of the 3 mental health indicators. The findings indicate that physical abuse, sexual abuse, exposure to IPV, and any child abuse were associated with increased odds of poorer past-month well-being and functioning (odds ratios [ORs] ranging from 1.6-3.7 at P < 0.05), increased odds of past-year mental conditions (ORs ranging from 2.3-2.9 at P < 0.05), and suicidal ideation (ORs ranging from 2.9-4.5 at P < 0.05). A dose-response type relationship was also noted with increasing number of child abuse types experienced corresponding to increased odds of poorer mental health outcomes. The associations between child abuse and overall mental health (see Table 1) based on the composite mental health measure are reported in Table 4. All child abuse experiences were associated with increased odds of poorer mental health, including moderate mental health (ORs ranging from 1.8-2.0 at P < 0.05) and poor mental health (ORs ranging from 3.4-5.4 at P < 0.05) relative to the best mental health category. In addition, a dose-response type relationship was also noted with increasing number of child abuse types experienced corresponding to higher odds of moderate and poor mental health outcomes.

Table 3.

Prevalence of Child Abuse by Mental Health Indicators of Past 12-Month Well-Being and Functioning, Past-Year Mental Conditions, and Past-Year Suicidal Ideation in the Canadian General Population.

Mental Health Indicators
Keyes’s Well-Being and Functioning Mental Condition Suicidal Ideation
Child abuse history Flourishing Moderate Languishing No Yes No Yes
Physical abuse
 Yes, % (95% CI) 69.37 (67.32, 71.35) 27.71 (25.76, 29.76) 2.91 (2.41, 3.52) 74.93 (73.19, 76.59) 25.07 (23.41, 26.81) 94.02 (93.14, 94.79) 5.98 (5.21, 6.86)
 No, % (95% CI) 79.47 (78.45, 80.45) 19.50 (18.55, 20.49) 1.03 (0.83, 1.28) 87.18 (86.31, 88.01) 12.82 (11.99, 13.69) 97.83 (97.42, 98.17) 2.17 (1.83, 2.58)
 OR (95% CI) 1.00 1.62 (1.44, 1.84)*** 3.24 (2.40, 4.37)*** 1.00 2.28 (2.02, 2.57)*** 1.00 2.87 (2.27, 3.63)***
Sexual abuse
 Yes, % (95% CI) 66.33 (63.38, 69.15) 30.15 (27.45, 32.98) 3.53 (2.58, 4.81) 67.68 (64.72, 70.51) 32.32 (29.49, 35.28) 90.62 (88.26, 92.54) 9.38 (7.46, 11.74)
 No, % (95% CI) 78.05 (77.11, 78.95) 20.68 (19.80, 21.59) 1.27 (1.08, 1.51) 85.89 (85.09, 86.65) 14.11 (13.35, 14.91) 97.57 (97.27, 97.85) 2.43 (2.15, 2.73)
 OR (95% CI) 1.00 1.72 (1.49, 1.98)*** 3.26 (2.23, 4.76)*** 1.00 2.91 (2.50, 3.38)*** 1.00 4.17 (3.14, 5.53)***
Exposure to IPV
 Yes, % (95% CI) 63.47 (59.65, 67.13) 32.57 (28.99, 36.36) 3.96 (2.80, 5.58) 68.88 (65.20, 72.33) 31.12 (27.67, 34.80) 89.58 (86.89, 91.77) 10.42 (8.23, 13.11)
 No, % (95% CI) 77.97 (77.06, 78.85) 20.71 (19.86, 21.59) 1.32 (1.12, 1.55) 85.26 (84.47, 86.02) 14.74 (13.98, 15.53) 97.45 (97.13, 97.74) 2.55 (2.26, 2.87)
 OR (95% CI) 1.00 1.93 (1.62, 2.30)*** 3.69 (2.47, 5.52)*** 1.00 2.61 (2.19, 3.12)*** 1.00 4.45 (3.33, 5.95)***
Any child abuse
 Yes, % (95% CI) 69.34 (67.57, 71.06) 27.84 (26.16, 29.59) 2.81 (2.35, 3.36) 75.60 (74.09, 77.05) 24.40 (22.95, 25.91) 93.97 (93.02, 94.81) 6.03 (5.19, 6.98)
 No, % (95% CI) 80.37 (79.35, 81.35) 18.72 (17.75, 19.73) 0.91 (0.72, 1.15) 87.93 (87.02, 88.78) 12.07 (11.22, 12.98) 98.19 (97.89, 98.45) 1.81 (1.55, 2.11)
 OR (95% CI) 1.00 1.72 (1.55, 1.92)*** 3.58 (2.66, 4.82)*** 1.00 2.35 (2.09, 2.64)*** 1.00 3.49 (2.78, 4.37)***
Number of child abuse types
 Zero, % (95% CI) 80.37 (79.35, 81.35) 18.72 (17.75, 19.73) 0.91 (0.72, 1.15) 87.93 (87.02, 88.78) 12.07 (11.22, 12.98) 98.19 (97.89, 98.45) 1.81 (1.55, 2.11)
  OR (95% CI) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
 One, % (95% CI) 71.49 (69.50, 73.39) 26.45 (24.55, 28.44) 2.06 (1.62, 2.63) 79.89 (78.12, 81.54) 20.11 (18.46, 21.88) 95.66 (94.49, 96.58) 4.34 (3.42, 5.51)
  OR (95% CI) 1.00 1.59 (1.41, 1.79)*** 2.55 (1.82, 3.56)*** 1.83 (1.60, 2.11)*** 2.47 (1.82, 3.34)***
 Two, % (95% CI) 67.46 (63.80, 70.92) 28.32 (25.05, 31.83) 4.23 (2.99, 5.93) 71.81 (68.43, 74.95) 28.19 (25.05, 31.57) 93.33 (91.76, 94.61) 6.67 (5.39, 8.24)
  OR (95% CI) 1.00 1.80 (1.51, 2.15)*** 5.53 (3.61, 8.46)*** 2.86 (2.39, 3.42)*** 3.89 (2.95, 5.13)***
 Three, % (95% CI) 55.92 (49.38, 62.27) 39.38 (32.85, 46.31) 4.70 (3.00, 7.30) 49.96 (42.96, 56.96) 50.04 (43.04, 57.04) 80.82 (74.93, 85.60) 19.18 (14.40, 25.07)
  OR (95% CI) 1.00 3.02 (2.25, 4.06)*** 7.42 (4.34, 12.67)*** 7.30 (5.45, 9.76)*** 12.90 (8.84, 18.80)***
Open in a new tab

Notes. Percentages are based on weighted N. Mental health indicators are not mutually exclusive. CI, confidence interval; IPV, intimate partner violence; OR, odds ratio.

***P < .001.

Table 4.

Associations between Child Abuse and Overall Measure of Mental Health Based on All 3 Mental Health Indicators in the Canadian General Population.

Mental Health Based on All 3 Mental Health Indicators
Child Abuse History Good Mental Health Moderate Mental Health Poor Mental Health
Physical abuse
 Yes, % (95% CI) 56.02 (53.88, 58.14) 35.93 (33.89, 38.01) 8.06 (7.16, 9.06)
 No, % (95% CI) 71.16 (69.97, 72.33) 25.85 (24.75, 26.99) 2.98 (2.57, 3.46)
 OR (95% CI) 1.00 1.77 (1.59, 1.97)*** 3.43 (2.79, 4.22)***
Sexual abuse
 Yes, % (95% CI) 50.59 (47.59, 53.58) 37.55 (34.77, 40.42) 11.86 (9.71, 14.41)
 No, % (95% CI) 69.14 (68.04, 70.23) 27.47 (26.42, 28.54) 3.39 (3.05, 3.76)
 OR (95% CI) 1.00 1.87 (1.64, 2.13)*** 4.78 (3.71, 6.17)***
Exposure to IPV
 Yes, % (95% CI) 47.84 (43.88, 51.83) 38.82 (35.03, 42.74) 13.34 (10.87, 16.27)
 No, % (95% CI) 68.85 (67.78, 69.89) 27.62 (26.61, 28.65) 3.54 (3.19, 3.91)
 OR (95% CI) 1.00 2.02 (1.70, 2.41)*** 5.43 (4.19, 7.03)***
Any child abuse
 Yes, % (95% CI) 56.28 (54.40, 58.14) 35.63 (33.87, 37.42) 8.10 (7.14, 9.18)
 No, % (95% CI) 72.36 (71.14, 73.54) 25.14 (24.00, 26.32) 2.50 (2.19, 2.87)
 OR (95% CI) 1.00 1.82 (1.65, 2.01)*** 4.16 (3.42, 5.07)***
Number of types of child abuse
 Zero, % (95% CI) 72.36 (71.14, 73.54) 25.14 (24.00, 26.32) 2.50 (2.19, 2.87)
  OR (95% CI) 1.00 1.00 1.00
 One, % (95% CI) 59.93 (57.73, 62.10) 34.17 (32.09, 36.32) 5.89 (4.84, 7.16)
  OR (95% CI) 1.00 1.64 (1.47, 1.84)*** 2.84 (2.20, 3.67)***
 Two, % (95% CI) 53.68 (49.65, 57.67) 36.51 (32.84, 40.33) 9.81 (8.03, 11.93)
  OR (95% CI) 1.00 1.96 (1.64, 2.34)*** 5.28 (4.04, 6.90)***
 Three, % (95% CI) 32.71 (27.32, 38.60) 45.35 (38.85, 52.01) 21.94 (16.96, 27.88)
  OR (95% CI) 1.00 3.99 (2.99, 5.33)*** 19.38 (13.46, 27.90)***
Open in a new tab

Notes. Percentages are based on weighted N. Good mental health indicates flourishing well-being and functioning, no mental conditions, and no suicidal ideation; moderate mental health indicates moderate well-being and functioning, with or without mental conditions, and no suicidal ideation; and poor mental health indicates languishing well-being and functioning, with or without mental conditions, and with or without suicidal ideation. CI, confidence interval; IPV, intimate partner violence; OR, odds ratio.

***P < .001.

Table 5 summarizes the results for the associations between individual- and relationship-level factors with overall mental health among respondents with and without a child abuse history. Higher education; higher income; being married or common-law compared to being separated, widowed, or divorced; having no physical health conditions; having moderate to vigorous levels of physical activity; having good to excellent coping skills for handling unexpected problems and day-to-day demands; and having high-quality relationships with friends and family, including aspects of attachment, guidance, reliable alliance, social integration, and reassurance of worth, were associated with increased odds of better mental health outcomes among respondents with and without a child abuse history. Sociodemographic characteristics and individual-level factors moderated the relationship between child abuse and overall mental health. Specifically, the impact of higher income, being married, and having good to excellent ability to handle unexpected problems on better mental health was significantly larger among respondents with a child abuse history compared to those who were not abused.

Table 5.

Results from the Multinomial Multivariable Analyses Examining the Relationship between Individual- and Relationship-Level Factors and Overall Measure of Mental Health Based on All 3 Mental Health Indicators among Individuals with and without a Child Abuse History in the Canadian General Population.

Individual- and Relationship-Level Factors No Child Abuse History, AOR (95% CI)a Child Abuse History, AOR (95% CI)a
Moderate Mental Health Good Mental Health Moderate Mental Health Good Mental Health
Sociodemographic variables      
 Education
  Less than high school 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
  High school 0.95 (0.60, 1.51) 1.20 (0.76, 1.90) 1.57 (0.98, 2.52) 1.94 (1.24, 3.04)**
  Some postsecondary 1.12 (0.57, 2.19) 1.46 (0.76, 2.83) 2.05 (1.21, 3.46)** 1.98 (1.16, 3.38)*
  Trade/college/university certificate/diploma 0.78 (0.51, 1.20) 1.14 (0.76, 1.72) 1.72 (1.16, 2.53)** 2.33 (1.61, 3.37)***
  University degree 1.53 (0.90, 2.61) 2.50 (1.49, 4.18)*** 2.01 (1.10, 3.68)* 4.08 (2.27, 7.33)***
 Income
  Less than $30,000 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
  $30,000-$49,999 1.46 (0.99, 2.17) 1.75 (1.19, 2.58)** 1.50 (0.94, 2.40) 1.83 (1.17, 2.85)**
  $50,000-$79,99 1.61 (1.09, 2.37)* 2.20 (1.50, 3.23)*** 1.71 (1.18, 2.50)** 3.02 (2.11, 4.33)***
  $80,000 or more 2.07 (1.36, 3.17)*** 3.28 (2.19, 4.90)*** 3.36 (2.30, 4.92)*** 7.79 (5.39, 11.25)***
 Marital status
  Separated/divorced/widowed 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
  Never married 0.92 (0.60, 1.41) 0.77 (0.50, 1.17) 1.24 (0.70, 2.19) 0.69 (0.39, 1.20)
  Married/common-law 1.40 (0.96, 2.03) 1.97 (1.38, 2.82)*** 2.02 (1.27, 3.20)** 2.34 (1.47, 3.72)***
Physical health      
 Any physical health condition
  Yes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
  No 1.37 (0.98, 1.92) 2.05 (1.50, 2.81)*** 2.27 (1.62, 3.18)*** 3.23 (2.32, 4.50)***
 Moderate/vigorous physical activity (past week)
  No 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
  Yes 1.67 (1.24, 2.26)*** 2.07 (1.53, 2.80)*** 1.47 (1.11, 1.95)** 1.93 (1.43, 2.59)***
Positive coping skills
 Handle unexpected problems
  Poor/fair 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
  Good/very good/excellent 1.84 (1.33, 2.54)*** 7.94 (5.75, 10.98)*** 2.42 (1.78, 3.29)*** 16.06 (11.10, 23.23)***
 Handle day-to-day demands
  Poor/fair 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
  Good/very good/excellent 3.04 (2.07, 4.47)*** 25.17 (16.98, 37.33)*** 3.67 (2.70, 4.97)*** 22.59 (15.88, 32.14)***
Neuroticism/distress      
 Neuroticism (0-30) 1.23 (1.19, 1.28)*** 1.65 (1.58, 1.72)*** 1.23 (1.19, 1.27)*** 1.63 (1.56, 1.71)***
Quality of relationships with family and friends      
 Attachment (2-8) 1.59 (1.38, 1.83)*** 2.47 (2.14, 2.86)*** 1.66 (1.47, 1.86)*** 2.73 (2.40, 3.10)***
 Guidance (2-8) 1.56 (1.38, 1.77)*** 2.43 (2.12, 2.77)*** 1.61 (1.45, 1.80)*** 2.56 (2.27, 2.88)***
 Reliable alliance (2-8) 1.58 (1.38, 1.81)*** 2.37 (2.05, 2.74)*** 1.58 (1.41, 1.77)*** 2.44 (2.15, 2.78)***
 Social integration (2-8) 1.50 (1.32, 1.70)*** 2.60 (2.29, 2.95)*** 1.70 (1.51, 1.92)*** 2.86 (2.52, 3.24)***
 Reassurance of worth (2-8) 1.60 (1.37, 1.86)*** 2.85 (2.45, 3.33)*** 1.74 (1.54, 1.98)*** 2.86 (2.49, 3.28)***
Open in a new tab

Notes. Good mental health indicates flourishing well-being and functioning, no mental conditions, and no suicidal ideation; moderate mental health indicates moderate well-being and functioning, with or without mental conditions, and no suicidal ideation; and poor mental health indicates languishing well-being and functioning, with or without mental conditions, and with or without suicidal ideation. AOR, odds ratios adjusted for age and sex; CI, confidence interval.

aPoor well-being and functioning is the reference category with an odds of 1.00.

*P < .05; **P < .01; ***P < .001.

Discussion

The study advances our current state of knowledge with the following novel findings. First, when using a more comprehensive assessment of overall mental health and a nationally representative sample, we found that only 56.3% of respondents with a child abuse history report good overall mental health compared to 72.4% of those without a child abuse history. Importantly, among respondents with a child abuse history, 35.6% and 8.1% reported moderate and poor mental health, respectively. Second, this study identified a wide range of individual- and relationship-level factors associated with better overall mental health among those with and without child abuse histories. These individual- and relationship-level factors may be useful targets for child maltreatment intervention strategies. They include higher education and income, moderate to vigorous physical activity, good coping skills to handle unexpected problems and day-to-day demands, and good-quality relationships with friends and family that focus on aspects of attachment, guidance, reliable alliance, social integration, and reassurance of worth.

Agreement on a common way to define and measure good overall mental health does not currently exist other than the recommendation of using a more comprehensive assessment, which includes several indicators of competence, well-being, functioning, and lack of disorders.40,56,57 The current study has created a more comprehensive assessment of overall mental health, including the absence of mental disorders and past-year suicidal thoughts, as well as the presence of current good well-being and functioning. Of note, more than half (56.3%) of respondents who experienced child abuse are considered to have good overall mental health according to our definition.

According to our findings, better mental health outcomes following child abuse may be more likely if the individual is able to stay in school for longer, obtain a well-paying job, be physically active, have the ability to handle unexpected problems and day-to-day demands, and have good quality relationships with friends and family. Our findings indicate that higher educational attainment and larger household income are associated with increased likelihood of better mental health for all respondents, including those with and without a child abuse history. However, the effect for income was significantly stronger among respondents with a child abuse history compared to those without. It is well known that lower income is associated with an increased likelihood of mental disorders.58 The current study suggests that higher levels of income may be especially protective among individuals who experienced child abuse. However, children who experience both child abuse and lower household income may be less able to stay in school and obtain a well-paying job compared to those who experience child abuse and grow up in a family with more economic resources. Childhood family poverty was not assessed in these data; therefore, this interpretation of the findings cannot be formally tested. Our findings also indicate that individuals reporting current moderate to vigorous physical activity have increased odds of better mental health outcomes. Although there has not been a large literature on child abuse and exercise, it is well established that exercise is associated with better mental health.59–64 Including exercise programs in child abuse intervention strategies may prove effective in increasing better mental health outcomes across various levels of socioeconomic status. Previous studies have examined how coping strategies and supportive relationships are related to better outcomes following child abuse.36,39,65,66 Notably, positive coping and well-being are not alternative measures of the same underlying construct. Rather, it has been found that positive emotions or outlook after adversity or chronic stress may facilitate adaptive coping and allow for better psychological well-being.67,68 What this study adds is the identification of specific coping intervention strategies and supportive relationships that may increase good mental health outcomes. Targeting the ability to effectively handle unexpected problems and day-to-day demands as well as supportive relationships that foster attachment, guidance, reliable alliance, social integration, and reassurance of self-worth may be important in increasing the likelihood of better mental health outcomes following child abuse.

The limitations of the current study should be considered when interpreting the findings. Because the data are cross-sectional and retrospective in nature, it is not possible to make any causal inferences. Although there is evidence for the validity and reliability of retrospective recall of adverse childhood events,69–71 there is no information available on the individual- and relationship-level factors present at the time of child abuse. Second, 3 major types of child abuse were included in the study, but measures of emotional abuse, physical or emotional neglect, exposure to other types of IPV such as emotional abuse, and other childhood adversities (e.g., childhood poverty) were not assessed in the survey. It is important for future studies to include these other adverse child experiences. Third, although several individual- and relationship-level factors were included in the current research, the list is not complete and further research is necessary to examine some protective factors in more detail (e.g., positive coping) and to include other factors related to better overall mental health outcomes. Notably, it will not be possible to ever develop one study that will include all potentially important factors.

Many of the individual-level factors associated with better mental health outcomes in this study are social determinants of health and should be priorities for improving mental health generally at the population level (e.g., higher education and income, as well as good coping skills72). Other factors, such as relationships that emphasize self-worth, are elements of some existing therapeutic interventions (e.g., treatments such as cognitive-behavioural therapy or interpersonal psychotherapy73) and can also be emphasized in the development of new approaches. Some factors, such as low household income and poor relationships, may be modifiable during childhood through programs that offer family income support, household budgeting seminars, and social skills, relationship, and parent training. When successful interventions are offered to families at risk, the result may be a reduction in child abuse and an increase in better mental health outcomes. The next steps would be to develop and measure the effectiveness of specific intervention strategies for individuals and families to determine if they reduce the prevalence of child abuse and subsequent impairment. Prevention of child abuse remains a priority. However, developing and testing evidence-based intervention strategies that are effective in improving overall mental health following child abuse is also imperative.

Acknowledgments

Statistics Canada collected and provided the data for academic purposes, but the analyses are the sole responsibility of the authors. The opinions expressed do not represent the views of Statistics Canada.

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests: The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding: The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: Preparation of this article was supported by a Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) operating grant (Afifi, MacMillan, Boyle, and Sareen), a CIHR New Investigator Award (Afifi), a Research Manitoba (formerly Manitoba Health Research Council) establishment award (Afifi), and a Research Manitoba Chair Award (Sareen). Dr. MacMillan is supported by the Chedoke Health Chair in Child Psychiatry. Dr. Boyle has a Canada Research Chair in the Social Determinants of Child Health.

References

  • 1. Afifi TO, MacMillan H, Boyle M, Taillieu T, Cheung K, Sareen J. Child abuse and mental disorders in Canada. CMAJ. 2014;186(9):E324–E332. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2. Gilbert R, Widom CS, Browne K, Fergusson D, Webb E, Janson S. Burden and consequences of child maltreatment in high-income countries. Lancet. 2009;373(9657):68–81. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3. El-Bassel N, Gilbert L, Witte S, et al. Intimate partner violence and substance abuse among minority women receiving care from an inner-city emergency department. Womens Health Issues. 2003;13(1):16–22. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4. Afifi TO, Mota NP, Dasiewicz P, MacMillan H, Sareen J. Physical punishment and mental disorders: results from a nationally representative US sample. Pediatrics. 2012;130(2):184–192. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5. Afifi TO, Mather A, Boman J, et al. Childhood adversity and personality disorders: results from a nationally representative population-based study. J Psychiatr Res. 2011;45(6):814–822. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6. Afifi TO, Enns MW, Cox BJ, Asmundson GJ, Stein MB, Sareen J. Population attributable fractions of psychiatric disorders and suicide ideation and attempts associated with adverse childhood experiences. Am J Public Health. 2008;98(5):946–952. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7. Afifi TO, Brownridge DA, Cox BJ, Sareen J. Physical punishment, childhood abuse and psychiatric disorders. Child Abuse Negl. 2006;30(10):1093–1103. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8. Afifi TO, Boman J, Fleisher W, Sareen J. The relationship between child abuse, parental divorce, and lifetime mental disorders and suicidality in a nationally representative adult sample. Child Abuse Negl. 2009;33(3):139–147. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9. Kessler RC, Davis CG, Kendler KS. Childhood adversity and adult psychiatric disorder in the US National Comorbidity Survey. Psychol Med. 1997;27(5):1101–1119. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10. MacMillan HL, Fleming JE, Streiner DL, Jamieson E, et al. Childhood abuse and lifetime psychopathology in a community sample. Am J Psychiatry. 2001;158:1878–1883. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11. Scott KM, Smith DR, Ellis PM. Prospectively ascertained child maltreatment and its association with DSM-IV mental disorders in young adults. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2010;67(7):712–719. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12. Greenfield EA, Marks NF. Identifying experiences of physical and psychological violence in childhood that jeopardize mental health in adulthood. Child Abuse Negl. 2010;34(3):161–171. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13. Herrenkohl TI, Klika JB, Herrenkohl RC, Russo MJ, Dee T. A prospective investigation of the relationship between child maltreatment and indicators of adult psychological well-being. Violence Vict. 2012;27(5):764–776. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14. Chartier MJ, Walker JR, Naimark B. Childhood abuse, adult health, and health care utilization: results from a representative community sample. Am J Epidemiol. 2007;165(9):1031–1038. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15. Afifi TO, Mota N, MacMillan HL, Sareen J. Harsh physical punishment in childhood and adult physical health. Pediatrics. 2013;132(2):e333–e340. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16. Chartier MJ, Walker JR, Naimark B. Health risk behaviors and mental health problems as mediators of the relationship between childhood abuse and adult health. Am J Public Health. 2009;99(5):847–854. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17. Afifi TO, MacMillan H, Boyle MH, et al. Child abuse and physical health in Canada. Health Rep. 2016;27(3):19–27. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18. Casiano H, Mota N, Afifi TO, Enns MW, Sareen J. Childhood maltreatment and threats with weapons. J Nerv Ment Dis. 2009;197(11):856–861. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19. Enns MW, Cox BJ, Afifi TO, et al. Childhood adversities and risk for suicidal ideation and attempts: a longitudinal population-based study. Psychol Med. 2006;36(12):1769–1778. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20. Afifi TO, Enns MW, Cox BJ, de Graaf R, ten Have M, Sareen J. Child abuse and health-related quality of life. J Nerv Ment Dis. 2007;195(10):797–804. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21. World Health Organization. Promoting mental health: concepts, emerging evidence, practice [Internet]. Geneva (Switzerland): WHO; 2005. Available from: http://www.who.int/mental_health/evidence/MH_Promotion_Book.pdf [Google Scholar]
  • 22. Keyes CLM. Mental illness and/or mental health? Investigating axioms of the complete state model of health. J Consult Clin Psychol. 2005;73(3):539–548. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23. Keyes CLM. Mental health in adolescence: is America’s youth flourishing? Am J Orthopsychiatry. 2006;76(3):395–402. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24. Keyes CLM. Promoting and protecting mental health as flourishing: a complementary strategy for improving national mental health. Am Psychol. 2007;62(2):95–108. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25. Westerhof GJ, Keyes CLM. Mental illness and mental health: the two continua model across the lifespan. J Adult Dev. 2010;17(2):110–119. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26. Keyes CLM. Atlanta: brief description of the Mental Health Continuum Short Form (MHC-SF). 2009. Available from: http://www.sociology.emory.edu/ckeyes/.
  • 27. Sareen J, Cox BJ, Afifi TO, et al. Anxiety disorders and risk for suicidal ideation and suicide attempts: a population-based longitudinal study of adults. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2005;62(11):1249–1257. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28. Orpana H, Vachon J, Dykxhoorn J, Mcrae L, Jayaraman G. Monitoring positive mental health and its determinants in Canada: the development of the Positive Mental Health Surveillance Indicator Framework. Health Promot Chronic Dis Prev Canada. 2016;36(1):1–10. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29. Mental Health Commission of Canada. Changing directions, changing lives. [Internet]. Calgary (AB): Mental Health Commission of Canada; 2012. Available from: http://strategy.mentalhealthcommission.ca/pdf/strategy-images-en.pdf [Google Scholar]
  • 30. Gilmour H. Positive mental health and mental illness. Health Rep. 2014;25(9):3–9. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31. Himelein MJ, McElrath JA. Resilient child sexual abuse survivors: cognitive coping and illusion. Child Abuse Negl. 1996;20(8):747–758. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32. Liem JH, James JB, O’Toole JG, Boudewyn AC. Assessing resilience in adults with histories of childhood sexual abuse. Am J Orthopsychiatry. 1997;67(4):594–606. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33. Cicchetti D, Rogosch FA, Lynch M, Holt KD. Resilience in maltreated children: processes leading to adaptive outcome. Dev Psychopathol. 1993;5(4):629–647. [Google Scholar]
  • 34. Cicchetti D, Rogosch FA. The role of self-organization in the promotion of resilience in maltreated children. Dev Psychopathol. 1997;9(4):797–815. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35. Herrenkohl EC, Herrenkohl RC, Egolf B. Resilient early school-age children from maltreating homes: outcomes in late adolescence. Am J Orthopsychiatry. 1994;64(2):301–309. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36. Spaccarelli S, Kim S. Resilience criteria and factors associated with resilience in sexually abused girls. Child Abuse Negl. 1995;19(9):1171–1182. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37. Hyman B, Williams L. Resilience among women survivors of child sexual abuse. Affilia. 2001;16(2):198–219. [Google Scholar]
  • 38. Sagy S, Dotan N. Coping resources of maltreated children in the family: a salutogenic approach. Child Abuse Negl. 2001;25(11):1463–1480. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39. DuMont KA, Widom CS, Czaja SJ. Predictors of resilience in abused and neglected children grown-up: the role of individual and neighborhood characteristics. Child Abuse Negl. 2007;31(3):255–274. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40. Afifi TO, MacMillan HL. Resilience following child maltreatment: a review of protective factors. Can J Psychiatry. 2011;56:266–272. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41. Statistics Canada. Canadian Community Health Survey (CCHS)—mental health user guide. Ottawa (ON): Statistics Canada; 2013. [Google Scholar]
  • 42. Statistics Canada. Canadian Community Health Survey (CCHS)—mental health questionnaire. Ottawa (ON): Statistics Canada; 2011. [Google Scholar]
  • 43. Walsh CA, MacMillan HL, Trocmé N, Jamieson E, Boyle MH. Measurement of victimization in adolescence: development and validation of the Childhood Experiences of Violence Questionnaire. Child Abuse Negl. 2008;32(11):1037–1057. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 44. Keyes CLM. The mental health continuum: from languishing to flourishing in life. J Health Soc Behav. 2002;43(2):207–222. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 45. Lamers S, Westerhof GJ, Bohlmeijer ET, ten Klooster PM, Keyes CLM. Evaluating the psychometric properties of the Mental Health Continuum–Short Form (MHC-SF). J Clin Psychol. 2011;67(1):99–110. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 46. Keyes C, Wissing M, Potgieter J, Temane M, Kriger A, van Rooy S. Evaluation of the Mental Health Continuum–Short Form (MHC-SF) in Setswana-Speaking South Africans. Clin Psychol Psychother. 2008;15:181–192. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 47. American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders. 4th ed, text rev Washington (DC): American Psychiatric Association; 2000. [Google Scholar]
  • 48. Statistics Canada. Canadian Community Health Survey—Mental Health. Derived Variable (DV) Specifications. Ottawa (ON): Statistics Canada; 2013. [Google Scholar]
  • 49. Gallagher MW, Lopez SJ, Preacher KJ. The hierarchical structure of well-being. J Pers. 2009;77(4):1025–1050. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 50. Lamers SMA, Glas CAW, Westerhof GJ, Bohlmeijer ET. Longitudinal evaluation of the Mental Health Continuum–Short Form (MHC-SF). Eur J Psychol Assess. 2012;28(4):290–296. [Google Scholar]
  • 51. Robitschek C, Keyes CLM. Keyes’s model of mental health with personal growth initiative as a parsimonious predictor. J Couns Psychol. 2009;56(2):290–296. [Google Scholar]
  • 52. Joshanloo M, Wissing MP, Khumalo IP, Lamers SMA. Measurement invariance of the Mental Health Continuum–Short Form (MHC-SF) across three cultural groups. Pers Individ Dif. 2013;55(7):755–759. [Google Scholar]
  • 53. Caron J. L’échelle de provisions sociales: une validation québécoise. Sante Ment Que. 1996;21(2):158–180. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 54. Cutrona CE, Russell D, Cultrona C, Daniel R. The provisions of social relationships and adaptation to stress. Adv Pers Relations. 1987;1(1):37–67. [Google Scholar]
  • 55. Caron J. Validation of the short form of the Social Provisions Scale: PSE-10 items. Ment Heal Quebec. 2013;38(1):297–318. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 56. Walsh WA, Dawson J, Mattingly MJ. How are we measuring resilience following childhood maltreatment? Is the research adequate and consistent? What is the impact on research, practice, and policy? Trauma Violence Abuse. 2010;11(1):27–41. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 57. Herrman H, Stewart DE, Diaz-Granados N, Berger EL, Jackson B, Yuen T. What is resilience? Can J Psychiatry. 2011;56(5):258–265. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 58. Sareen J, Afifi TO, McMillan KA, Asmundson GJG. Relationship between household income and mental disorders: findings from a population-based longitudinal study. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2011;68(4):419–427. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 59. Silveira H, Moraes H, Oliveira N, Coutinho ESF, Laks J, Deslandes A. Physical exercise and clinically depressed patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Neuropsychobiology. 2013;67(2):61–68. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 60. Nyström MBT, Neely G, Hassmén P, Carlbring P. Treating major depression with physical activity: a systematic overview with recommendations. Cogn Behav Ther. 2015;44(4):341–352. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 61. Wang D, Wang Y, Wang Y, Li R, Zhou C. Impact of physical exercise on substance use disorders: a meta-analysis. PLoS One. 2014;9(10):e110728. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 62. Knapen J, Vancampfort D, Moriën Y, Marchal Y. Exercise therapy improves both mental and physical health in patients with major depression. Disabil Rehabil. 2015;37(16):1490–1495. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 63. Stanton R, Happell B. Exercise for mental illness: a systematic review of inpatient studies. Int J Ment Health Nurs. 2014;23(3):232–242. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 64. Rosenbaum S, Tiedemann A, Sherrington C, Curtis J, Ward PB. Physical activity interventions for people with mental illness. J Clin Psychiatry. 2014;75(9):964–974. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 65. Collishaw S, Pickles A, Messer J, Rutter M, Shearer C, Maughan B. Resilience to adult psychopathology following childhood maltreatment: evidence from a community sample. Child Abuse Negl. 2007;31(3):211–229. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 66. Daigneault I, Hébert M, Tourigny M. Personal and interpersonal characteristics related to resilient developmental pathways of sexually abused adolescents. Child Adolesc Psychiatr Clin North Am. 2007;16(2):415–434. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 67. Folkman S, Moskowitz JT. Positive affect and the other side of coping. Am Psychol. 2000;55(6):647–654. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 68. Tugade MM, Fredrickson BL, Barrett LF. Psychological resilience and positive emotional granularity: examining the benefits of positive emotions on coping and health. J Pers. 2004;72(6):1161–1190. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 69. Hardt J, Vellaisamy P, Schoon I. Sequelae of prospective versus retrospective reports of adverse childhood experiences. Psychol Rep. 2010;107(2):425–440. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 70. Hardt J, Rutter M. Validity of adult retrospective reports of adverse childhood experiences: review of the evidence. J Child Psychol Psychiatry. 2004;45(2):260–273. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 71. Hardt J, Sidor A, Bracko M, Egle U. Reliability of retrospective assessments of childhood experiences in Germany. J Nerv Ment Dis. 2006;194(9):676–683. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 72. Public Health Agency of Canada. Social Determinants of Health [Internet]. 2015. [cited 2015 Jan 10]. Available from: http://cbpp-pcpe.phac-aspc.gc.ca/public-health-topics/social-determinants-of-health/.
  • 73. Linde K, Rücker G, Sigterman K, et al. Comparative effectiveness of psychological treatments for depressive disorders in primary care: network meta-analysis. BMC Fam Pract. 2015;16(1):103. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Canadian Journal of Psychiatry. Revue Canadienne de Psychiatrie are provided here courtesy of SAGE Publications

RESOURCES