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