Beyond coping: The role of supportive relationships and meaning making in youth well-being.

INTRODUCTION: The purpose of this study was to identify coping strategies, resources, and strengths that predict well-being in a community-based sample of youth with varying levels of adversity. DESIGN: Grounded in the resilience portfolio model, we used a mixed methods approach with data from a cross-sectional sample of 231 youth ages 8-17. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data were collected using a survey, participant-generated timeline activity, and brief interview. Measures included assessments of coping and appraisal, resilience resources and assets, and subjective well-being and depression. RESULTS: Active and passive coping strategies predicted subjective well-being and depression. Controlling for demographics and coping, meaning making strengths and supportive relationships were significant predictors of subjective well-being and lower depression, and decreased the impact of adversity on these outcomes. DISCUSSION: The results of this study provide support for the resilience portfolio model in a community-based sample of youth, with relationships as predicted for subjective well-being and symptoms of depression. For both outcomes, family relationships held the strongest associations with positive well-being and lower symptoms of depression. Supportive relationships with peers, meaning making strengths, interpersonal strengths, less passive coping, and fewer adverse life events were also associated with better outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: These findings underscore the need to assess youth resources and strengths and to design interventions that target these protective factors for all youth, regardless of exposure to adversity. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: A theory-informed understanding of resources and strengths that predict youth well-being is essential to inform strengths-based interventions for pediatric research and practice. The resilience portfolio model is a useful framework for understanding predictors of youth well-being.

Assessment of Youth Coping and Appraisals Through a Timelining Activity: Validation and Utility of a Tool for Pediatric Research and Practice.

INTRODUCTION: Many tools to assess coping in youth fail to engage youth meaningfully in the assessment process. This study aimed to evaluate a brief timeline activity as an interactive way to assess appraisal and coping in pediatric research and practice. METHOD: We used a mixed method convergent design to collect and analyze survey and interview data from 231 youths aged 8-17 years in a community-based setting. RESULTS: The youth engaged readily in the timeline activity and found the activity easy to understand. Relationships among appraisal, coping, subjective well-being and depression were in the hypothesized directions, suggesting the tool supports a valid assessment of appraisals and coping in this age group. DISCUSSION: The timelining activity is well-accepted by youth and supports reflexivity, prompting youth to share insights on strengths and resilience. The tool may augment existing practices for assessing and intervening in youth mental health in research and practice.

Participant-generated timelines as a novel strategy for assessing youth resilience factors: A mixed-methods, community-based study.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to explore youth perceptions of resilience through participant-generated timelines as a potential new strategy for nursing research and practice. DESIGN AND METHODS: We used a concurrent triangulation design to collect and analyze qualitative and quantitative data from a statewide, community-based sample of 448 youth ages 8 to 17 years. We collected three sources of data during two waves of data collection in 2019 and 2021: a participant-generated timeline, a brief structured interview, and a PROMIS pediatric global health measure. RESULTS: The timeline activity was easy to administer and well accepted by youth in a community setting. Youth reporting an adverse experience or mental health challenge in the previous year had unique patterns of variability in the timelines, and more frequently reported certain resilience factors, including family support and regulatory, interpersonal, and meaning-making assets. Pandemic-related differences were noted between the two cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: The timeline drawing activity reflects and extends findings from a standard measure of global health. This activity benefits both the participant and the clinician or researcher by helping youth to communicate how they make sense of the world, honoring different ways of knowing and prompting recollection of coping appraisals and resilience factors. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Participant-generated timelines are a developmentally appropriate and interactive strategy for assessing youth perceptions of their internal strengths. In conjunction with traditional assessments, this strategy may support the identification of malleable targets for intervention in practice with youth who have experienced adversity or mental health challenges.