COVID-19 pandemic-related aspects and predictors of emotional and behavioural symptoms in youth with pre-existing mental health conditions: results from Georgia, Lithuania, Romania, Serbia, and Turkey.

OBJECTIVE: This study evaluated levels of and predictors of emotional and behavioral symptoms in youth with pre-existing mental health conditions over the early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 across Georgia, Lithuania, Romania, Serbia, and Turkey. METHODS: The study included 421 children and adolescents aged 5 - 18 years with pre-existing mental health conditions and corresponding ongoing treatments. We used a parent- and/or child-report, which taps into a broad range of mental health symptoms and contextual factors thought to be particularly pertinent during periods of social restrictions. Data were collected simultaneously across the countries from May 2020 to August 2020. RESULTS: According to parents, 121 (33.1%) children had deteriorations in the overall quality of mental health over the COVID-19, 156 (43.1%) deteriorations in the quantity of mental health care received, while 82 (25.1%) mental health care received did not meet the needs. For 121 (49.8%) of children, there was worsening in the main presenting psychiatric symptom compared to January 2020, while for 64 (26.3%) there was some improvement. In total, 128 (43.9%) children reported worsened emotional and 118 (40.6%) behavioral symptoms. The COVID-related worry, parental emotional difficulties, and parent-child relationships emerged as the most relevant predictors for higher levels of emotional and behavioral difficulties. CONCLUSIONS: This study found that the COVID-19 pandemic has considerably changed the daily lives of some children with pre-existing mental health conditions, where almost every second child had deteriorations in overall mental health or worsening of psychiatric symptoms.

Adaptation of the Strength and Difficulties Questionnaire for Use in the Republic of Georgia.

Background: Children in low-resource countries like Georgia often have limited access to assessment measures for mental health care services. This study adapts and validates the mental health screening tool the Strength and Difficulties Questionnaire for use in Georgian children. Methods: A total of 16 654 children were assessed by a parent and/or teacher using Georgian-adapted Strength and Difficulties Questionnaire. Receiver operating characteristic analyses were performed to assess the discriminative validity of the Strength and Difficulties Questionnaires and to establish an optimal cutoff score. Results: Data from 15 738 parents- and 13 560 teachers-administered Strength and Difficulties Questionnaire were analyzed. The internal consistency analysis showed Cronbach's alpha to be 0.625 and 0.621 for parent- and teacher-administered Strength and Difficulties Questionnaire, respectively. The area under the curve (95% CI) shows that the Strength and Difficulties Questionnaire can differentiate risk group children from typically developing peers: parent-administered questionnaires-0.629 (0.556-0.702) and teacher-administered questionnaires-0.680 (0.611-0.789). Parent-administered Strength and Difficulties Questionnaire has a cutoff value of 16 or more with 92.5% of sensitivity and teacher-administered Strength and Difficulties Questionnaire-14 or more with a sensitivity of 85.6%. Conclusion: The study finds that the Strength and Difficulties Questionnaire is a valid screening instrument and does not depend on the informant-parent or teacher. It suggests that with appropriate cultural adaptation, the SDQ can be used in the Republic of Georgia to identify children at risk for mental disorders and help guide resource allocation.

Measurement invariance of the Childhood Autism Rating Scale (CARS) across six countries.

The Childhood Autism Rating Scale (CARS) is a simple and inexpensive tool for Autism spectrum disorder (ASD) assessments, with evidenced psychometric data from different countries. However, it is still unclear whether ASD symptoms are measured the same way across different societies and world regions with this tool, since data on its cross-cultural validity are lacking. This study evaluated the cross-cultural measurement invariance of the CARS among children with ASD from six countries, for whom data were aggregated from previous studies in India (n = 101), Jamaica (n = 139), Mexico (n = 72), Spain (n = 99), Turkey (n = 150), and the United States of America (n = 186). We analyzed the approximate measurement invariance based on Bayesian structural equation modeling. The model did not fit the data and its measurement invariance did not hold, with all items found non-invariant across the countries. Items related to social communication and interaction (i.e., relating to people, imitation, emotional response, and verbal and nonverbal communication) displayed lower levels of cross-country non-invariance compared to items about stereotyped behaviors/sensory sensitivity (i.e., body and object use, adaptation to change, or taste, smell, and touch response). This study found that the CARS may not provide cross-culturally valid ASD assessments. Thus, cross-cultural comparisons with the CARS should consider first which items operate differently across samples of interest, since its cross-cultural measurement non-invariance could be a source of cross-cultural variability in ASD presentations. Additional studies are needed before drawing valid recommendations in relation to the cultural sensitivity of particular items.