Skip to main content
. 2018 Oct 15;13(10):e0205808. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0205808

Table 1. Characteristics of the included studies on the prevalence of childhood maltreatment among college students in China.

Study Geographic location Sampling method Measurement tool No. of sampling sites Sample size Response rate No. of maltreatment Quality score Stratification variables
Total CPA CEA CSA CPN CEN
Wang CP/2017 Shanxi probability CPANS 3 500 92.6% NR NR 227 NR NR NR 6 NR
Yang L/2017 Gansu, etc. non-probability CPANS 3 388 92.4% NR NR 102 NR NR NR 5 NR
Si Q/2017 Inner Mongolia probability CTQ 1 219 83.9% NR 38 84 26 112 119 5 NR
Guo LY/2015 Liaoning probability CTQ 3 999 89.0% NR NR NR 226 NR NR 6 NR
Niu Y/2015 NR probability CTQ 1 2653 93.2% NR 462 1719 599 1857 2134 6 NR
Li J/2015 Heilongjiang probability CTQ 4 929 91.6% NR 174 584 155 748 763 5 gender, residence
Ma YJ/2015 NR probability CTQ 1 247 61.8% NR 69 142 63 151 174 4 NR
Chen C/2015 Liaoning probability CTQ 1 809 89.9% 253 NR NR NR NR NR 6 NR
Jia GZ/2015 Shandong probability CTQ 4 1000 90.9% NR 226 972 157 476 747 6 gender, residence
Guo LY/2015 Liaoning probability CTQ 1 217 90.4% 191 73 150 73 137 138 5 NR
Jin YY/2015 Anhui probability CTQ 1 932 94.6% NR 106 325 179 200 375 6 gender, residence
Ji Y/2014 Hebei, etc. non-probability CTQ >4 213 88.8% NR 42 148 41 157 166 3 NR
Wang JH/2014 Heilongjiang probability CTQ 4 450 95.3% 212 33 181 54 189 186 6 gender, residence
Li WT/2014 NR probability CTQ 1 2845 92.9% NR 560 NR 546 2096 2216 5 NR
Wang JH/2014 Heilongjiang probability CTQ >4 475 95.0% 416 88 181 99 268 338 6 NR
Li HZ/2013 Zhejiang NR CPANS 2 468 93.6% NR NR 96 NR NR NR 4 NR
Cui NX/2013 Shandong non-probability ACE 1 492 91.5% 229 4 8 55 39 123 6 NR
Zhu XH/2012 Jiangsu probability PRCA 3 2374 97.6% NR 337 745 38 NR NR 6 NR
Ma JF/2012 Xinjiang probability ACE 1 475 99.4% 366 57 172 107 98 46 6 gender, residence
Fan YG/2011 Anhui probability ACE 1 1071 97.0% 728 288 41 94 149 287 6 gender, residence
Yuan H/2011 Tianjin probability CPANS 1 450 80.3% NR NR 97 NR NR NR 6 NR
Huang H/2011 Heilongjiang probability CPANS 2 448 89.6% NR NR 94 NR NR NR 6 NR
Yang SC/2011 Henan probability CECA.Q 1 733 97.7% NR 34 NR NR NR NR 6 NR
Ji Y/2011 Hebei non-probability CTQ 1 215 89.6% NR 35 101 23 120 143 3 NR
Zeng Q/2011 NR probability CTQ 1 667 91.0% NR 195 331 218 667 667 5 NR
He Y/2010 Hunan, etc. non-probability CTQ 3 412 96.0% NR 111 266 110 371 368 5 NR
Su Y/2009 Anhui probability ACE 3 758 93.6% 454 237 27 17 217 126 7 gender
Xie ZJ/2008 Hunan probability CPANS 2 457 91.4% NR NR 99 NR NR NR 6 gender
Ling H/2008 Hunan probability CECA.Q 2 313 97.8% NR 21 NR 21 NR NR 6 NR
Cai XJ/2008 Inner Mongolia probability CTQ 1 270 90.0% NR 47 122 54 230 227 5 NR
Liao Y/2006 Hunan probability CPANS 2 216 85.7% NR NR 45 NR NR NR 5 gender
Yao J/2006 Anhui probability ACE 3 2073 86.9% 1408 553 80 127 616 317 7 gender, residence

Note. NR = none reported; CPA = physical abuse; CEA = emotional abuse; CSA = sexual abuse; CPN = physical neglect; CEN = emotional neglect; CTQ = Childhood Trauma Questionnaire; CPANS = Child Psychological Abuse and Neglect Scale; ACE = Adverse Childhood Experience; CECA.Q = Childhood Experience of Care and Abuse Questionnaire; PRCA = Personal Report of Childhood Abuse