Measuring Adverse Childhood Experiences: Comparing Individual, Composite, Score-based and Latent Profile-based Scoring Schemas Among Gay, Bisexual, and Other Men Who Have Sex with Men

Abstract

Adverse childhood experiences (ACEs; e.g., neglect, sexual abuse) among gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men (GBM) may not occur in isolation, but may be connected and occur in clusters. Most studies have measured ACEs individually, hierarchically, additively, or in a binary fashion (presence or absence of ACEs), rather than treating them as connected and clustered. This study examined these competing approaches of scoring ACEs and their relative power at predicting health outcomes. We examined abuse (sexual, physical, and emotional) and neglect (physical and emotional) experiences among a non-random sample of 470 Toronto GBM using the Childhood Trauma Questionnaire Short Form subscales. We compared five scoring schemas: (1) five individual scores for each form of maltreatment; (2) a composite score summing all of the maltreatment scores; (3) a hierarchical regression model with sexual abuse entered first then followed by physical abuse, emotional abuse, physical neglect, and emotional neglect; (4) a severity-based categorization; and (5) a latent profile-based categorization. Experiences of abuse and neglect were not uncommon (22-33%) and some participants experienced multiple forms of abuse and neglect (r=.33-.65, df=464-467; p<.001; shared variance, r(2)=11-43%). Results show the dose-response effects of ACEs and highlight the importance of examining ACEs in clusters rather than individually. Latent profile analysis identified GBM who experienced multiple and frequent ACEs, and also identified the types of ACEs they experienced: crucial information that was obscured in score-based or severity-based approaches.