Canadian Institutes of Health Research.

No abstract

This study examined parental behaviors as mediators in links between depressive symptoms in mothers and fathers and child adjustment problems. Participants were 4,184 parents and 6,048 10- to 15-year-olds enrolled in the 1998 and 2000 cycles of the Canadian National Longitudinal Survey of Children and Youth. Mothers and fathers self-reported symptoms of depression at Times 1 and 2 and their children assessed parental nurturance, rejection, and monitoring and self-reported internalizing and externalizing problems and prosocial behavior at Time 2. Hierarchical linear modeling showed evidence of mediation involving all three domains of parental behavior. Findings supported the hypothesis that the quality of the child's rearing environment is one mechanism that carries risk to children of depressed parents. Interventions for parents whose symptoms of depression interfere with parenting responsibilities could help reduce the risk of some childhood disorders.

Brief assessments of parenting practices can provide important information about the development of disruptive behavior disorders in children. We examined the factor structure of a widely used assessment of parenting practices, the Alabama Parenting Questionnaire, and produced a 9-item short scale around its three supported factors: Positive Parenting, Inconsistent Discipline and Poor Supervision. The short scale was then validated in independent community samples using confirmatory factor analysis and measures of disruptive behavioral disorders in children. The scale showed good fit to a three-factor model and good convergent validity by differentiating parents of children with disruptive behavioral disorders and parents of children without such disorders. Results indicated that this new measure is an informative tool for researchers and clinicians whom require brief assessments of parenting practices relating to disruptive behavioral disorders in children.Theories of social development posit that there is a relationship between the quality and consistency of parenting practices and emotional and behavioral problems in children. Previous research shows that deficiencies in parent's discipline and nurturance might be

ObjectiveTo estimate prevalence of suicidal ideation and suicidal ideation with a plan in each surveyed country and to examine cross-national differences in associated risk factors.MethodsWe analysed data of students aged 13–17 years who participated in the 2003–2012 Global School-based Health Surveys in 32 countries, of which 29 are low- and middle-income. We used random effects meta-analysis to generate regional and overall pooled estimates. Multivariable logistic regression was used to estimate risk ratios for the associated risk factors. Population attributable fractions were estimated based on adjusted risk ratios and the prevalence of the determinants within each exposure level.FindingsAcross all countries, the pooled 12-month prevalence of suicide ideation were 16.2% (95% confidence interval, CI: 15.6 to 16.7) among females and 12.2% (95% CI: 11.7 to 12.7) among males and ideation with a plan were 8.3% (95% CI: 7.9 to 8.7) among females and 5.8% (95% CI: 5.5 to 6.1) among males. Suicide ideation in the WHO Region of the Americas was higher in females than males, with an estimated prevalence ratio of 1.70 (95% CI: 1.60 to 1.81), while this ratio was 1.04 (95% CI: 0.98 to 1.10) in the WHO African Region. Factors associated with suicidal ideation in most countries included experiences of bullying and physical violence, loneliness, limited parental support and alcohol and tobacco use.ConclusionThe prevalence of adolescent suicidal behaviours varies across countries, yet a consistent set of risk factors of suicidal behaviours emerged across all regions and most countries.

The first year of college is a period of vulnerability for weight problems. Further research is needed to better understand freshman weight gain and devise appropriate prevention strategies based on predictors of gain.

No abstract

Can social contextual factors explain international differences in the spread of COVID-19? It is widely assumed that social cohesion, public confidence in government sources of health information and general concern for the welfare of others support health advisories during a pandemic and save lives. We tested this assumption through a time-series analysis of cross-national differences in COVID-19 mortality during an early phase of the pandemic. Country data on income inequality and four dimensions of social capital (trust, group affiliations, civic responsibility and confidence in public institutions) were linked to data on COVID-19 deaths in 84 countries. Associations with deaths were examined using Poisson regression with population-averaged estimators. During a 30-day period after recording their tenth death, mortality was positively related to income inequality, trust and group affiliations and negatively related to social capital from civic engagement and confidence in state institutions. These associations held in bivariate and mutually controlled regression models with controls for population size, age and wealth. The results indicate that societies that are more economically unequal and lack capacity in some dimensions of social capital experienced more COVID-19 deaths. Social trust and belonging to groups were associated with more deaths, possibly due to behavioural contagion and incongruence with physical distancing policy. Some countries require a more robust public health response to contain the spread and impact of COVID-19 due to economic and social divisions within them.