Skip to main content

Table 2 Bivariate Cox proportional hazard regression models for maltreatment report after temporary custody cancelation

From: Cumulative risk effect of household dysfunction for child maltreatment after intensive intervention of the child protection system in Japan: a longitudinal analysis

 

Number

Report

Crude HR

95% CI

p

n (%)

 

759

76 (10.0)

   

Child characteristics

 Age

  

0.90

[0.85, 0.95]

< .001

 Sex

  Female

355

38 (10.7)

1.15

[0.73, 1.80]

0.554

 Behavior problems

386

43 (11.1)

1.30

[0.83, 2.05]

0.250

Family characteristics

 Ethnicity

  Non-Japanese

57

7 (12.3)

1.22

[0.56, 2.65]

0.622

 Caregiver divorce

638

71 (11.1)

2.50

[1.01, 6.20]

0.048

 Parents

  Biological

153

17 (11.1)

1.00

[ref.]

 

  Step

108

12 (11.1)

1.03

[0.49, 2.16]

0.934

  Single

446

45 (10.1)

0.91

[0.52, 1.59]

0.747

  Other

45

1 (2.2)

0.19

[0.03, 1.46]

0.111

 Number of siblings

  

0.97

[0.84, 1.13]

0.740

 Receiving public assistance

234

23 (9.8)

0.90

[0.55, 1.47]

0.673

Household dysfunction

 Interparental violence

354

45 (12.7)

1.74

[1.10, 2.74]

0.018

 Mental health problem

330

42 (12.7)

1.67

[1.06, 2.63]

0.026

 Substance abuse

171

28 (16.4)

2.13

[1.34, 3.40]

0.001

History of maltreatment

 Physical abuse

437

59 (13.5)

2.71

[1.58, 4.65]

< .001

 Emotional abuse

545

67 (12.3)

3.08

[1.54, 6.17]

0.002

 Sexual abuse

79

4 (5.1)

0.48

[0.17, 1.31]

0.149

 Neglect

483

63 (13.0)

2.92

[1.61, 5.31]

< .001

CGC case characteristic

 Amount of prior CGC involvement

  

0.93

[0.84, 1.02]

0.106

 Duration of temporary custody

  

1.00

[0.99, 1.00]

0.258

 Post-temporary custody service

  Out-of-home

239

8 (3.3)

0.21

[0.11, 0.40]

< .001

  1. Note: All analyses were performed with missing values imputed by multiple imputation method
  2. CGC child guidance center (out-of-home, therapeutic institutions, or foster parents), HR hazard ratio, CI confidence interval