Violeta J Rodriguez, Geraldine De Jesus Cadet, Michaela Sisitsky, Cameryn Cooley,
Juliana Acosta, Erika Coles, Bianka Charity-Parker, Anne Walters, Anne Shaffer,
Justin Parent

Abstract:

The present study explored measurement invariance of the Multidimensional Assessment of Parenting Scale (MAPS; Parent & Forehand, 2017) across White, Hispanic, Black, and Asian American parents. Participants included 2,734 parents, 58% of whom were mothers. On average, parents were 36.32 years old (SD = 9.54); the parent sample was 66.9% White non-Hispanic, 10.1% Black, 5.3% Asian, and 17.7% Hispanic regardless of race. Child ages ranged from 3 to 17 years (M = 9.84, SD = 3.71), and 58% were identified as male. Parents completed a demographics questionnaire about themselves and their target child, and the 34-item MAPS. We explored measurement equivalence of the MAPS Broadband Positive and Negative parenting scales using item response theory to identify differential item functioning (DIF). Univariate analyses for Positive and Negative Parenting showed reliability was excellent. Twelve items assessing negative aspects of parenting exhibited bias by race/ethnicity. Specifically, when comparing racial and ethnic groups, three items had nonuniform DIF comparing Black and Asian participants, two items had nonuniform DIF comparing Black and Hispanic participants, and one item showed nonuniform DIF comparing Asian and Hispanic participants. When looking at Positive Parenting, no items showed evidence of DIF. Results from the present study suggest broadband Positive Parenting can be compared across ethnoracial groups, while findings raise concern about assessing Negative Parenting items when examining invariance across race and ethnicity. Findings from the present study imply that racial and ethnic comparisons are potentially invalid. These findings offer guidance for improving parenting assessment for racially/ethnically diverse populations. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

Alexandria M. Reynolds, Andrea M. Spaeth, Lauren Hale, Ariel A. Williamson, Monique K. LeBourgeois, Sachi D. Wong, Lauren E. Hartstein, Jessica C. Levenson, Misol Kwon, Chantelle N. Hart, Ashley Greer, Cele E. Richardson, Michael Gradisar, Michelle A. Clementi, Stacey L. Simon, Lilith M. Reuter-Yuill, Daniel L. Picchietti, Salome Wild, Leila Tarokh, Kathy Sexton-Radek, Beth A. Malow, Kristina P. Lenker, Susan L. Calhoun, Dayna A. Johnson, Daniel Lewin
and Mary A. Carskadon

Abstract:

This White Paper addresses the current gaps in knowledge, as well as opportunities for future studies in pediatric sleep. The Sleep Research Society’s Pipeline Development Committee assembled a panel of experts tasked to provide information to those interested in learning more about the field of pediatric sleep, including trainees. We cover the scope of pediatric sleep, including epidemiological studies and the development of sleep and circadian rhythms in early childhood and adolescence. Additionally, we discuss current knowledge of insufficient sleep and circadian disruption, addressing the neuropsychological impact (affective functioning) and cardiometabolic consequences. A significant portion of this White Paper explores pediatric sleep disorders (including circadian rhythm disorders, insomnia, restless leg and periodic limb movement disorder, narcolepsy, and sleep apnea), as well as sleep and neurodevelopment disorders (e.g. autism and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder). Finally, we end with a discussion on sleep and public health policy. Although we have made strides in our knowledge of pediatric sleep, it is imperative that we address the gaps to the best of our knowledge and the pitfalls of our methodologies. For example, more work needs to be done to assess pediatric sleep using objective methodologies (i.e. actigraphy and polysomnography), to explore sleep disparities, to improve accessibility to evidence-based treatments, and to identify potential risks and protective markers of disorders in children. Expanding trainee exposure to pediatric sleep and elucidating future directions for study will significantly improve the future of the field

Ruby Mendenhall, Jong Cheol Shin, Florence Adibu, Malina Marlyn Yago, Rebecca Vandewalle, Andrew Greenlee and Diana S. Grigsby-Toussaint

Abstract:

During historical and contemporary crises in the U.S., Blacks and other marginalized groups experience an increased risk for adverse health, social, and economic outcomes. These outcomes are driven by structural factors, such as poverty, racial residential segregation, and racial discrimination. These factors affect communities’ exposure to risk and ability to recover from disasters, such as pandemics. This study examines whether areas where descendants of enslaved Africans and other Blacks lived in Chicago were vulnerable to excess death during the 1918 influenza pandemic and whether these disparities persisted in the same areas during the COVID-19 pandemic. To examine disparities, demographic data and influenza and pneumonia deaths were digitized from historic weekly paper maps from the week ending on 5 October 1918 to the week ending on 16 November 1918. Census tracts were labeled predominantly Black or white if the population threshold for the group in a census tract was 40% or higher for only one group. Historic neighborhood boundaries were used to aggregate census tract data. The 1918 spatial distribution of influenza and pneumonia mortality rates and cases in Chicago was then compared to the spatial distribution of COVID-19 mortality rates and cases using publicly available datasets. The results show that during the 1918 pandemic, mortality rates in white, immigrant and Black neighborhoods near industrial areas were highest. Pneumonia mortality rates in both Black and immigrant white neighborhoods near industrial areas were approximately double the rates of neighborhoods with predominantly US-born whites. Pneumonia mortality in Black and immigrant white neighborhoods, far away from industrial areas, was also higher (40% more) than in US-born white neighborhoods. Around 100 years later, COVID-19 mortality was high in areas with high concentrations of Blacks based on zip code analysis, even though the proportion of the Black population with COVID was similar or lower than other racial and immigrant groups. These findings highlight the continued cost of racial disparities in American society in the form of avoidable high rates of Black death during pandemics.

Hannah E. Frank, Lara S. Rifkin, Kate Sheehan, Emily M. Becker-Haimes,
Margaret E. Crane, Katherine E. Phillips, Sophie A. Palitz Buinewicz, Joshua Kemp,
Kristen Benito and Philip C. Kendall

Abstract:

Background: Despite evidence for its efficacy, exposure therapy for anxiety is rarely used in routine care settings. Efforts to address one major barrier to its use – therapists’ negative beliefs about exposure – have included therapist-level implementation strategies, such as training and consultation. Experiential training, in which therapists themselves undergo exposures, has recently demonstrated feasibility, acceptability and preliminary effectiveness for increasing exposure use.

Aims: This study aimed to assess: (1) therapists’ perceptions of experiential training and (2) barriers and facilitators to implementing exposure following training.

Method: Therapists who underwent experiential training (n = 12) completed qualitative interviews and quantitative questionnaires. Interviews were coded using an integrated approach, combining both inductive and deductive approaches. Mixed methods analyses examined how themes varied by practice setting (community mental health versus private practice) and exposure use.

Results: Results highlight how therapist-level factors, such as clinician self-efficacy, interact with inner and outer-setting factors. Participants reported positive perceptions of exposure after training; they noted that directly addressing myths about exposure and experiencing exposures themselves improved their attitudes toward exposure. Consistent with prior literature, issues such as insufficient supervisory support, organizational constraints, and client characteristics made it challenging to implement exposures.

Discussion: Results highlight the benefits of experiential training, while also highlighting the need to consider contextual determinants. Differences in responses across practice settings highlight areas for intervention and the importance of tailoring implementation strategies. Barriers that were specific to therapists who did not use exposure (e.g. hesitancy about its appropriateness for most clients) point to directions for future implementation efforts.