Parent and child mental health trajectories April 2020 to May 2021: Strict lockdown versus no lockdown in Australia.

OBJECTIVE: To control a second-wave COVID-19 outbreak, the state of Victoria in Australia experienced one of the world's first long and strict lockdowns over July-October 2020, while the rest of Australia experienced 'COVID-normal' with minimal restrictions. We (1) investigate trajectories of parent/child mental health outcomes in Victoria vs non-Victoria and (2) identify baseline demographic, individual and COVID-19-related factors associated with mental health trajectories. METHODS: Online community sample of 2004 Australian parents with rapid repeated assessment over 14 time-points over April 2020 to May 2021. Measures assessed parent mental health (Depression, Anxiety and Stress Scales-21), child depression symptoms (13-item Short Mood and Feelings Questionnaire) and child anxiety symptoms (four items from Brief Spence Children's Anxiety Scale). RESULTS: Mental health trajectories shadowed COVID-19 infection rates. Victorians reported a peak in mental health symptoms at the time of the second-wave lockdown compared to other states. Key baseline predictors, including parent and child loneliness (standardized regression coefficient [ß] = 0.09-0.46), parent/child diagnoses (ß = 0.07-0.21), couple conflict (ß = 0.07-0.18) and COVID-19 stressors, such as worry/concern about COVID-19, illness and loss of job (ß = 0.12-0.15), predicted elevated trajectories. Effects of predictors on parent and child mental health trajectories are illustrated in an online interactive app for readers (https://lingtax.shinyapps.io/CPAS_trend/). CONCLUSION: Our findings provide evidence of worse trajectories of parent and child mental health symptoms at a time coinciding with a second COVID-19 outbreak involving strict lockdown in Victoria, compared to non-locked states in Australia. We identified several baseline factors that may be useful in detecting high-risk families who are likely to require additional support early on in future lockdowns.

Creation of a Short-Form and Brief Short-Form Version of the Coping With Children's Negative Emotions Scale.

The Coping with Children's Negative Emotions Scale (CCNES) is a widely used measure of parent emotion socialization; however, it is a lengthy measure and it is unclear whether all items are appropriately aligned with, and fully capture, the underlying constructs. We aimed to examine content validity of the CCNES, evaluate the theoretical alignment between the CCNES and Gottman, Katz and Hooven's meta-emotion theory, and develop two short-forms. Participants were parents of children aged 4 to 10 years (N = 937) from the longitudinal study the Child and Parent Emotion Study (https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/10/10/e038124). Content experts qualitatively evaluated parent-report items of the CCNES and additional items that measured empathy. Nineteen of the 84 items were found to not align with the meta-emotion theory. The latent structures of the CCNES and empathy subscales were quantitatively evaluated via confirmatory factor analysis. Items with poor psychometric properties were subsequently removed. An 18-item short-form (three emotion coaching subscales, three emotion dismissing subscales) and 6-item brief short-form (one emotion coaching subscale, one emotion dismissing subscale) with strong psychometric properties were created using a calibration sample (n = 468, that is, 50% of N = 937) and cross-validated with a validation sample. The short-form CCNES measures provide viable, theoretically consistent alternatives to the original CCNES measure.

Profiles of parents' emotion socialization within a multinational sample of parents.

Introduction: Seminal emotion socialization theories classify parents according to two patterns of parent emotion socialization processes: 'emotion coaching' (i.e., parents validate and teach children about emotions) versus 'emotion dismissing' parenting (i.e., parents minimize and dismiss their children's emotions). However, empirical evidence supporting this binary distinction of parents remains limited. Our objective was to investigate whether parents can be differentiated by distinct patterns in their (1) beliefs about children's emotions, (2) emotion regulation, and (3) emotion-related parenting practices. Method: Participants were parents of children aged 4-10 years from the Child and Parent Emotion Study (N = 869) (https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/10/10/e038124). Parents completed self-reported measures of emotion socialization processes via an online survey, which took 20-30 min to complete. Data included in the current study were collected May-August 2019. We conducted a latent profile analysis of parents' emotion socialization (13 indicators). To assess reliability of the profiles, we examined stability of the profiles across (1) parents of children in early versus middle childhood, and (2) fathers versus mothers, via measurement invariance testing. Further, to assess for construct validity of the profiles, we examined concurrent associations between six criterion constructs and parents' emotion socialization profiles. Results: A three-profile model emerged characterizing parents by: (1) emotion coaching; (2) emotion dismissing; (3) emotion disengaged. There was strong support for construct validity and reliability. Discussion: Our study provides empirical support for distinct differentiated classifications of emotion coaching and emotion dismissing parenting, aligned with emotion socialization theories. We further extend on extant theory and suggest a third 'emotion disengaged' classification, describing parents with moderate levels of emotion dismissing parenting and low levels of emotion coaching parenting. It should be noted that the profiles were derived with self-report data, therefore, data may have been biased by contextual factors. Furthermore, the study sample consisted of Western families from affluent backgrounds. The field should focus efforts on conducting person-centered studies with more diverse samples in future.

Text mining of Reddit posts: Using latent Dirichlet allocation to identify common parenting issues.

Parenting interventions offer an evidence-based method for the prevention and early intervention of child mental health problems, but to-date their population-level effectiveness has been limited by poor reach and engagement, particularly for fathers, working mothers, and disadvantaged families. Tailoring intervention content to parents' context offers the potential to enhance parent engagement and learning by increasing relevance of content to parents' daily experiences. However, this approach requires a detailed understanding of the common parenting situations and issues that parents face day-to-day, which is currently lacking. We sought to identify the most common parenting situations discussed by parents on parenting-specific forums of the free online discussion forum, Reddit. We aimed to understand perspectives from both mothers and fathers, and thus retrieved publicly available data from r/Daddit and r/Mommit. We used latent Dirichlet allocation to identify the 10 most common topics discussed in the Reddit posts, and completed a manual text analysis to summarize the parenting situations (defined as involving a parent and their child aged 0-18 years, and describing a potential/actual issue). We retrieved 340 (r/Daddit) and 578 (r/Mommit) original posts. A model with 31 latent Dirichlet allocation topics was best fitting, and 24 topics included posts that met our inclusion criteria for manual review. We identified 45 unique but broadly defined parenting situations. The majority of parenting situations were focused on basic childcare situations relating to eating, sleeping, routines, sickness, and toilet training; or related to how to respond to child negative emotions or difficult behavior. Most situations were discussed in relation to infant or toddler aged children, and there was high consistency in the themes raised in r/Daddit and r/Mommit. Our results offer potential to tailor parenting interventions in a meaningful way, creating opportunities to develop content and resources that are directly relevant to parents' lived experiences.

Subjective wellbeing in parents during the COVID-19 pandemic in Australia.

OBJECTIVES: To examine (1) the subjective wellbeing of Australian parents raising children and adolescents (0-18 years) during April 2020 'stage three' COVID-19 restrictions, in comparison with parents assessed over 18-years prior to the pandemic; and (2) socio-demographic and COVID-19 predictors of subjective wellbeing during the pandemic. METHODS: Cross-sectional data were from the COVID-19 Pandemic Adjustment Survey (CPAS, N = 2365 parents of a child 0-18 years, 8-28th April 2020); and a pre-pandemic national database containing 18 years of annual surveys collected in 2002-2019 (N = 17,529 parents). RESULTS: Levels of subjective wellbeing during the pandemic were considerably lower than ratings prior to the pandemic (Personal Wellbeing Index, mean[SD] = 65.3 [17.0]; compared to [SD] = 75.8 [11.9], p < 0.001). During the pandemic, lower subjective wellbeing was associated with low education (adjusted regression coefficient, 95% confidence interval [95% CI] = -5.19, -0.93), language other-than-English (95% CI = -7.22, -1.30), government benefit (95% CI = -6.99, -0.96), single parents (95% CI = -8.84, -4.59), child neurodevelopmental condition (95% CI = -3.44, -0.76), parent physical/mental health problems (95% CI = -3.23, -0.67), COVID-environmental stressors (95% CI = -3.48, -2.44), and fear/worry about COVID-19 (95% CI = -8.13, -5.96). Unexpectedly, parent engagement with news media about the pandemic was associated with higher subjective wellbeing (95% CI = 0.35, 1.61). CONCLUSION: Subjective wellbeing in parents raising children aged 0-18 years appears to be disproportionately impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic and restrictions in Australia. Specific at-risk groups, for which government intervention may be warranted, include parents in socially disadvantaged contexts, parents with pre-existing mental health difficulties, and parents facing significant COVID-19-related work changes.

Child and Parent Physical Activity, Sleep, and Screen Time During COVID-19 and Associations With Mental Health: Implications for Future Psycho-Cardiological Disease?

The COVID-19 pandemic has afforded the opportunity for some to improve lifestyle behaviours, while for others it has presented key challenges. Adverse changes in global lifestyle behaviours, including physical activity, sleep, and screen time can affect proximal mental health and in turn distal cardiovascular outcomes. We investigated differences in physical activity, sleep, and screen time in parents and children during early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic in Australia compared to pre-COVID-19 national data; and estimated associations between these movement behaviours with parent and child mental health. Cross-sectional baseline data from the COVID-19 Pandemic Adjustment Study (CPAS; N = 2,365) were compared to nationally representative pre-pandemic data from the Longitudinal Study of Australian Children (LSAC; N = 9,438). Participants were parents of children aged ≤ 18 years, residing in Australia. Parents provided self-report measures of mental health, physical activity and sleep quality, and reported on child mental health, physical activity and screen time. Children in CPAS had significantly more sleep problems and more weekend screen time. Their parents had significantly poorer sleep quality, despite increased weekly physical activity. Children's sleep problems were significantly associated with increased mental health problems, after accounting for socioeconomic status, physical activity, and screen time. Poorer parent sleep quality and lower levels of physical activity were significantly associated with poorer mental health. Monitoring this cohort over time will be important to examine whether changes in movement behaviour are enduring or naturally improve with the easing of restrictions; and whether these changes have lasting effects on either parent or child mental health, and in turn, future risk for CVD.

The Child and Parent Emotion Study: protocol for a longitudinal study of parent emotion socialisation and child socioemotional development.

INTRODUCTION: Parents shape child emotional competence and mental health via their beliefs about children's emotions, emotion-related parenting, the emotional climate of the family and by modelling emotion regulation skills. However, much of the research evidence to date has been based on small samples with mothers of primary school-aged children. Further research is needed to elucidate the direction and timing of associations for mothers and fathers/partners across different stages of child development. The Child and Parent Emotion Study (CAPES) aims to examine longitudinal associations between parent emotion socialisation, child emotion regulation and socioemotional adjustment at four time points from pregnancy to age 12 years. CAPES will investigate the moderating role of parent gender, child temperament and gender, and family background. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: CAPES recruited 2063 current parents from six English-speaking countries of a child 0-9 years and 273 prospective parents (ie, women/their partners pregnant with their first child) in 2018-2019. Participants will complete a 20-30 min online survey at four time points 12 months apart, to be completed in December 2022. Measures include validated parent-report tools assessing parent emotion socialisation (ie, parent beliefs, the family emotional climate, supportive parenting and parent emotion regulation) and age-sensitive measures of child outcomes (ie, emotion regulation and socioemotional adjustment). Analyses will use mixed-effects regression to simultaneously assess associations over three time-point transitions (ie, T1 to T2; T2 to T3; T3 to T4), with exposure variables lagged to estimate how past factors predict outcomes 12 months later. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval was granted by the Deakin University Human Research Ethics Committee and the Deakin University Faculty of Health Human Research Ethics Committee. We will disseminate results through conferences and open access publications. We will invite parent end users to co-develop our dissemination strategy, and discuss the interpretation of key findings prior to publication. TRIAL REGISTERATION: Protocol pre-registration: DOI 10.17605/OSF.IO/NGWUY.