The Distinction Between Social Connectedness and Support When Examining Depressive Symptoms Among Children and Adolescents During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Childhood depression is associated with significant social and functional impairment, suicide risk, and persistence throughout adulthood. Recent evidence demonstrates that social connectedness and social support may serve as protective factors against the development of depression. The current study aimed to examine the effect of change in social connectedness and social support on depressive symptoms among children and adolescents during the COVID-19 pandemic. Hierarchical regression was performed. Results indicated that parent-reported measures of change in social connectedness were inversely associated with depressive symptom severity, and could significantly predict future depressive symptom severity. In contrast, parent-reported measures of social support (i.e., from family and friends) did not significantly predict future depressive symptom severity. The presence of a pre-COVID psychiatric and/or neurodevelopmental diagnosis and baseline depressive symptom severity were also important factors associated with future depressive symptom severity. The findings suggest that an awareness of the presence of social supports (i.e., family or friends) is not sufficient for children to feel connected, but rather the mechanisms of social relationships are crucial. As our approach to public health restrictions evolves, the risk transmission of COVID-19 should be carefully balanced with the risks associated with decreased connectedness among youth.

Anxiety in children and youth: Part 2-The management of anxiety disorders.

Anxiety disorders are the most common mental health concerns affecting Canadian children and adolescents. The Canadian Paediatric Society has developed two position statements that summarize current evidence regarding the diagnosis and management of anxiety disorders. Both statements offer evidence-informed guidance to support paediatric health care providers (HCPs) making decisions around the care of children and adolescents with these conditions. The objectives of Part 2, which focuses on management, are to: (1) review the evidence and context for a range of clinical approaches that combine behavioural and pharmacological interventions to effectively address impairment, (2) describe the roles of education and psychotherapy in the prevention and treatment of anxiety disorders, and (3) outline the use of pharmacotherapy, with side effects and risks. Recommendations for managing anxiety are based on current guidelines, review of the literature, and expert consensus. Note that when the word 'parent' (singular or plural) is used, it includes any primary caregiver and every configuration of family.

Mostly worse, occasionally better: impact of COVID-19 pandemic on the mental health of Canadian children and adolescents.

This large cross-sectional study examined the impact of COVID-19 emergency measures on child/adolescent mental health for children/adolescents with and without pre-existing psychiatric diagnoses. Using adapted measures from the CRISIS questionnaire, parents of children aged 6-18 (N = 1013; 56% male; 62% pre-existing psychiatric diagnosis) and self-reporting children/adolescents aged 10-18 (N = 385) indicated changes in mental health across six domains: depression, anxiety, irritability, attention, hyperactivity, and obsessions/compulsions. Changes in anxiety, irritability, and hyperactivity were calculated for children aged 2-5 years using the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire. COVID-19 exposure, compliance with emergency measures, COVID-19 economic concerns, and stress from social isolation were measured with the CRISIS questionnaire. Prevalence of change in mental health status was estimated for each domain; multinomial logistic regression was used to determine variables associated with mental health status change in each domain. Depending on the age group, 67-70% of children/adolescents experienced deterioration in at least one mental health domain; however, 19-31% of children/adolescents experienced improvement in at least one domain. Children/adolescents without and with psychiatric diagnoses tended to experience deterioration during the first wave of COVID-19. Rates of deterioration were higher in those with a pre-exiting diagnosis. The rate of deterioration was variable across different age groups and pre-existing psychiatric diagnostic groups: depression 37-56%, anxiety 31-50%, irritability 40-66%, attention 40-56%, hyperactivity 23-56%, obsessions/compulsions 13-30%. Greater stress from social isolation was associated with deterioration in all mental health domains (all ORs 11.12-55.24). The impact of pre-existing psychiatric diagnosis was heterogenous, associated with deterioration in depression, irritability, hyperactivity, obsession/compulsions for some children (ORs 1.96-2.23) but also with improvement in depression, anxiety, and irritability for other children (ORs 2.13-3.12). Economic concerns were associated with improvement in anxiety, attention, and obsessions/compulsions (ORs 3.97-5.57). Children/adolescents with and without pre-existing psychiatric diagnoses reported deterioration. Deterioration was associated with increased stress from social isolation. Enhancing social interactions for children/adolescents will be an important mitigation strategy for current and future COVID-19 waves.

Guidelines for Reporting Outcomes in Trial Reports: The CONSORT-Outcomes 2022 Extension.

Importance: Clinicians, patients, and policy makers rely on published results from clinical trials to help make evidence-informed decisions. To critically evaluate and use trial results, readers require complete and transparent information regarding what was planned, done, and found. Specific and harmonized guidance as to what outcome-specific information should be reported in publications of clinical trials is needed to reduce deficient reporting practices that obscure issues with outcome selection, assessment, and analysis. Objective: To develop harmonized, evidence- and consensus-based standards for reporting outcomes in clinical trial reports through integration with the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) 2010 statement. Evidence Review: Using the Enhancing the Quality and Transparency of Health Research (EQUATOR) methodological framework, the CONSORT-Outcomes 2022 extension of the CONSORT 2010 statement was developed by (1) generation and evaluation of candidate outcome reporting items via consultation with experts and a scoping review of existing guidance for reporting trial outcomes (published within the 10 years prior to March 19, 2018) identified through expert solicitation, electronic database searches of MEDLINE and the Cochrane Methodology Register, gray literature searches, and reference list searches; (2) a 3-round international Delphi voting process (November 2018-February 2019) completed by 124 panelists from 22 countries to rate and identify additional items; and (3) an in-person consensus meeting (April 9-10, 2019) attended by 25 panelists to identify essential items for the reporting of outcomes in clinical trial reports. Findings: The scoping review and consultation with experts identified 128 recommendations relevant to reporting outcomes in trial reports, the majority (83%) of which were not included in the CONSORT 2010 statement. All recommendations were consolidated into 64 items for Delphi voting; after the Delphi survey process, 30 items met criteria for further evaluation at the consensus meeting and possible inclusion in the CONSORT-Outcomes 2022 extension. The discussions during and after the consensus meeting yielded 17 items that elaborate on the CONSORT 2010 statement checklist items and are related to completely defining and justifying the trial outcomes, including how and when they were assessed (CONSORT 2010 statement checklist item 6a), defining and justifying the target difference between treatment groups during sample size calculations (CONSORT 2010 statement checklist item 7a), describing the statistical methods used to compare groups for the primary and secondary outcomes (CONSORT 2010 statement checklist item 12a), and describing the prespecified analyses and any outcome analyses not prespecified (CONSORT 2010 statement checklist item 18). Conclusions and Relevance: This CONSORT-Outcomes 2022 extension of the CONSORT 2010 statement provides 17 outcome-specific items that should be addressed in all published clinical trial reports and may help increase trial utility, replicability, and transparency and may minimize the risk of selective nonreporting of trial results.

Guidelines for Reporting Outcomes in Trial Protocols: The SPIRIT-Outcomes 2022 Extension.

Importance: Complete information in a trial protocol regarding study outcomes is crucial for obtaining regulatory approvals, ensuring standardized trial conduct, reducing research waste, and providing transparency of methods to facilitate trial replication, critical appraisal, accurate reporting and interpretation of trial results, and knowledge synthesis. However, recommendations on what outcome-specific information should be included are diverse and inconsistent. To improve reporting practices promoting transparent and reproducible outcome selection, assessment, and analysis, a need for specific and harmonized guidance as to what outcome-specific information should be addressed in clinical trial protocols exists. Objective: To develop harmonized, evidence- and consensus-based standards for describing outcomes in clinical trial protocols through integration with the Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials (SPIRIT) 2013 statement. Evidence Review: Using the Enhancing the Quality and Transparency of Health Research (EQUATOR) methodological framework, the SPIRIT-Outcomes 2022 extension of the SPIRIT 2013 statement was developed by (1) generation and evaluation of candidate outcome reporting items via consultation with experts and a scoping review of existing guidance for reporting trial outcomes (published within the 10 years prior to March 19, 2018) identified through expert solicitation, electronic database searches of MEDLINE and the Cochrane Methodology Register, gray literature searches, and reference list searches; (2) a 3-round international Delphi voting process (November 2018-February 2019) completed by 124 panelists from 22 countries to rate and identify additional items; and (3) an in-person consensus meeting (April 9-10, 2019) attended by 25 panelists to identify essential items for outcome-specific reporting to be addressed in clinical trial protocols. Findings: The scoping review and consultation with experts identified 108 recommendations relevant to outcome-specific reporting to be addressed in trial protocols, the majority (72%) of which were not included in the SPIRIT 2013 statement. All recommendations were consolidated into 56 items for Delphi voting; after the Delphi survey process, 19 items met criteria for further evaluation at the consensus meeting and possible inclusion in the SPIRIT-Outcomes 2022 extension. The discussions during and after the consensus meeting yielded 9 items that elaborate on the SPIRIT 2013 statement checklist items and are related to completely defining and justifying the choice of primary, secondary, and other outcomes (SPIRIT 2013 statement checklist item 12) prospectively in the trial protocol, defining and justifying the target difference between treatment groups for the primary outcome used in the sample size calculations (SPIRIT 2013 statement checklist item 14), describing the responsiveness of the study instruments used to assess the outcome and providing details on the outcome assessors (SPIRIT 2013 statement checklist item 18a), and describing any planned methods to account for multiplicity relating to the analyses or interpretation of the results (SPIRIT 2013 statement checklist item 20a). Conclusions and Relevance: This SPIRIT-Outcomes 2022 extension of the SPIRIT 2013 statement provides 9 outcome-specific items that should be addressed in all trial protocols and may help increase trial utility, replicability, and transparency and may minimize the risk of selective nonreporting of trial results.

Mental health profiles of autistic children and youth during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Objectives: Canadian province-wide lockdowns have challenged children's mental health (MH) during the COVID-19 pandemic, with autistic children being at particular risk. The purpose of our study was to identify sub-groups of autistic children with distinct mental health change profiles, to understand the child-, parent-, and system-specific factors associated with such profiles in order to ultimately inform future interventions. Methods: Data were drawn from a large Canadian cohort (N=1,570) across Ontario, resulting in 265 autistic children (mean age=10.9 years, 76% male). K-means clustering analyses were employed to partition distinct MH profiles in six MH measures (mood, anxiety, OCD symptoms, irritability, inattention, hyperactivity) and group differences were examined with reference to the above factors. Additionally, we investigated the characteristics of children who accessed acute MH services. Results: The optimal number of clusters was two; one included those experiencing MH deterioration across all six MH measures (61.3%, 95% confidence interval [CI]=54.9 to 67.4), and a second included youth that did not experience MH changes (38.7%, 95%CI=32.6 to 45.1). Child-specific factors associated with MH deterioration included higher pre-existing internalizing symptoms, high levels of COVID stress. Parental MH challenges and system-specific factors, such as the loss of learning supports, access to physicians and material deprivation, were also associated with MH deterioration. Access to acute MH services were primarily associated with financial insecurity and loss of services. Conclusions: More than half of autistic children experienced MH deterioration, and person-specific (pre-existing MH, COVID related stress), parent-specific (Parent MH) and system-level (loss of services and material deprivation) characteristics were associated with such decline, providing clinical and policy opportunities for intervention at multiple levels.

School and learning contexts during the COVID-19 pandemic: Implications for child and youth mental health.

Despite significant disruption to school during the COVID-19 pandemic, research on the impact on children is sparse. This study examines in-person and virtual learning contexts and the impact of school format on mental health (MH). Children and adolescents were recruited from community and clinical settings. Parents and children completed prospective online surveys about school experiences (November 2020) and MH symptoms (February/March 2021), including school format and activities. Standardized measures of depression, anxiety, inattention, and hyperactivity were collected. Hierarchical regression analyses tested associations between school format and MH. Children (N = 1011; aged 6-18 years) attending school in-person (n = 549) engaged in high levels of participation in COVID-19 health measures and low levels of social learning activities. Learning online in high school was associated with greater MH symptoms (B = -2.22, CI[-4.32,-.12] to B = -8.18, CI[-15.59,-.77]). Children with no previous MH condition that attended school virtually experienced a similar magnitude of MH symptoms as those with previous MH conditions. However, children who attended school in a hybrid in-person format, with no previous MH condition, experienced less hyperactivity as same-age peers with prior MH problems (B = -8.08, CI[1.58,14.58]). Children's learning environments looked very different compared to before the pandemic. Removing children from school environments and limiting opportunities that support their MH, such as social learning activities, is problematic. Efforts to address the learning contexts to protect the mental health of children are needed.

Forks in the road: Definitions of response, remission, recovery, and other dichotomized outcomes in randomized controlled trials for adolescent depression. A scoping review.

BACKGROUND: Definitions of dichotomous outcome terms, such as "response," "remission," and "recovery" are central to the design, interpretation, and clinical application of randomized controlled trials of adolescent depression interventions. Accordingly, this scoping review was conducted to document how these terms have been defined and justified in clinical trials. METHOD: Bibliographic databases MEDLINE, Embase, APA PsycInfo, and CINAHL were searched from inception to February 2020 for randomized controlled trials evaluating treatments for adolescent depression. Ninety-eight trials were included for data extraction and analysis. RESULTS: Assessment of outcome measurement instruments, metric strategies, methods of aggregation, and measurement timing, yielded 53 unique outcome definitions of "response" across 45 trials that assessed response, 47 unique definitions of "remission" in 29 trials that assessed remission, and 19 unique definitions of "recovery" across 11 trials that assessed recovery. A minority of trials (N = 35) provided a rationale for dichotomous outcomes definitions, often by citing other studies that used a similar definition (N = 11). No rationale included input from youth or families with lived experience. CONCLUSION: Our review revealed that definitions of "response," "remission," "recovery," and related terms are highly variable, lack clear rationales, and are not informed by key stakeholder input. These limitations impair pooling of trial results and the incorporation of trial findings into pragmatic treatment decisions in clinical practice. Systematic approaches to establishing outcome definitions are needed to enhance the impact of trials examining adolescent depression treatment.

Vulnerability pathways to mental health outcomes in children and parents during COVID-19.

We examined pathways from pre-existing psychosocial and economic vulnerability to mental health difficulties and stress in families during the COVID-19 pandemic. Data from two time points from a multi-cohort study initiated during the COVID-19 pandemic were used. Parents of children 6-18 years completed questionnaires on pre-COVID-19 socioeconomic and demographic factors in addition to material deprivation and stress due to COVID-19 restrictions, mental health, and family functioning. Youth 10 years and older also completed their own measures of mental health and stress. Using structural equation modelling, pathways from pre-existing vulnerability to material deprivation and stress due to COVID-19 restrictions, mental health, and family functioning, including reciprocal pathways, were estimated. Pre-existing psychosocial and economic vulnerability predicted higher material deprivation due to COVID-19 restrictions which in turn was associated with parent and child stress due to restrictions and mental health difficulties. The reciprocal effects between increased child and parent stress and greater mental health difficulties at Time 1 and 2 were significant. Reciprocal effects between parent and child mental health were also significant. Finally, family functioning at Time 2 was negatively impacted by child and parent mental health and stress due to COVID-19 restrictions at Time 1. Psychosocial and economic vulnerability is a risk factor for material deprivation during COVID-19, increasing the risk of mental health difficulties and stress, and their reciprocal effects over time within families. Implications for prevention policy and parent and child mental health services are discussed. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s12144-021-02459-z.

Recruitment of adolescents with suicidal ideation in the emergency department: lessons from a randomized controlled pilot trial of a youth suicide prevention intervention.

BACKGROUND: Emergency Departments (EDs) are a first point-of-contact for many youth with mental health and suicidality concerns and can serve as an effective recruitment source for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of mental health interventions. However, recruitment in acute care settings is impeded by several challenges. This pilot RCT of a youth suicide prevention intervention recruited adolescents aged 12 to 17 years presenting to a pediatric hospital ED with suicide related behaviors. METHODS: Recruitment barriers were identified during the initial study recruitment period and included: the time of day of ED presentations, challenges inherent to study presentation, engagement and participation during an acute presentation, challenges approaching and enrolling acutely suicidal patients and families, ED environmental factors, and youth and parental concerns regarding the study. We calculated the average recruitment productivity for published trials of adolescent suicide prevention strategies which included the ED as a recruitment site in order to compare our recruitment productivity. RESULTS: In response to identified barriers, an enhanced ED-centered recruitment strategy was developed to address low recruitment rate, specifically (i) engaging a wider network of ED and outpatient psychiatry staff (ii) dissemination of study pamphlets across multiple areas of the ED and relevant outpatient clinics. Following implementation of the enhanced recruitment strategy, the pre-post recruitment productivity, a ratio of patients screened to patients randomized, was computed. A total of 120 patients were approached for participation, 89 (74.2%) were screened and 45 (37.5%) were consented for the study from March 2018 to April 2019. The screening to randomization ratio for the study period prior to the introduction of the enhanced recruitment strategies was 3:1, which decreased to 1.8:1 following the implementation of enhanced recruitment strategies. The ratio for the total recruitment period was 2.1:1. This was lower than the average ratio of 3.2:1 for published trials. CONCLUSIONS: EDs are feasible sites for participant recruitment in RCTs examining new interventions for acute mental health problems, including suicidality. Engaging multi-disciplinary ED staff to support recruitment for such studies, proactively addressing anticipated concerns, and creating a robust recruitment pathway that includes approach at outpatient appointments can optimize recruitment. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov : NCT03488602 , retrospectively registered April 4, 2018.

Primary outcome reporting in adolescent depression clinical trials needs standardization.

BACKGROUND: Evidence-based health care is informed by results of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and their syntheses in meta-analyses. When the trial outcomes measured are not clearly described in trial publications, knowledge synthesis, translation, and decision-making may be impeded. While heterogeneity in outcomes measured in adolescent major depressive disorder (MDD) RCTs has been described, the comprehensiveness of outcome reporting is unknown. This study aimed to assess the reporting of primary outcomes in RCTs evaluating treatments for adolescent MDD. METHODS: RCTs evaluating treatment interventions in adolescents with a diagnosis of MDD published between 2008 and 2017 specifying a single primary outcome were eligible for outcome reporting assessment. Outcome reporting assessment was done independently in duplicate using a comprehensive checklist of 58 reporting items. Primary outcome information provided in each RCT publication was scored as "fully reported", "partially reported", or "not reported" for each checklist item, as applicable. RESULTS: Eighteen of 42 identified articles were found to have a discernable single primary outcome and were included for outcome reporting assessment. Most trials (72%) did not fully report on over half of the 58 checklist items. Items describing masking of outcome assessors, timing and frequency of outcome assessment, and outcome analyses were fully reported in over 70% of trials. Items less frequently reported included outcome measurement instrument properties (ranging from 6 to 17%), justification of timing and frequency of outcome assessment (6%), and justification of criteria used for clinically significant differences (17%). The overall comprehensiveness of reporting appeared stable over time. CONCLUSIONS: Heterogeneous reporting exists in published adolescent MDD RCTs, with frequent omissions of key details about their primary outcomes. These omissions may impair interpretability, replicability, and synthesis of RCTs that inform clinical guidelines and decision-making in this field. Consensus on the minimal criteria for outcome reporting in adolescent MDD RCTs is needed.

A suicide prevention strategy for youth presenting to the emergency department with suicide related behaviour: protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Suicide is a leading cause of death among adolescents in North America. Youth who present to the Emergency Department (ED) with acute suicidality are at increased risk for eventual death by suicide, thereby presenting an opportunity for secondary prevention of suicide. The current study evaluates the effectiveness of a standardized individual and family-based suicidal behaviour risk reduction intervention targeting adolescents at high-risk for suicide. METHODS: A randomized controlled trial (RCT) will be conducted to evaluate the effectiveness of a manualized youth- and family- based suicide prevention strategy (SPS) as compared with case navigation (NAV) among adolescents aged 12 to 18 years of age who present to the ED with acute suicidal ideation (SI) or suicide risk behaviours (SRB). We will recruit 128 participants and compare psychiatric symptoms including SI/SRB, family communication, and functional impairment at baseline and follow-ups (post-intervention [6 weeks], 24 weeks). The primary outcome is change in suicidal ideation measured with the Suicide Ideation Questionnaire- Junior. SRBs are measured with the Suicide Behaviour Questionnaire. Secondary outcomes are change in depressive and anxious symptoms measured with semi-structured psychiatric interview and Screen for Child Anxiety Related Disorders; acute mental health crises measured by urgent medical (including ED) visits; family communication measured with Conflict Behaviour Questionnaire, functional impairment measured by Columbia Impairment Scale; cost effectiveness, and fidelity of implementation measured by audio recording and fidelity checklist. DISCUSSION: Results of this study will inform a larger multi-centre RCT that will include both community and academic hospitals in urban and rural settings. Study results will be shared at international psychiatry and emergency medicine meetings, in local rounds, and via publication in academic journals and clinician-oriented newsletters. If effective, the intervention may provide a brief, scalable, and transportable treatment program that may be implemented in a variety of settings, including those in which access to children's mental health care services is challenging. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03488602, retrospectively registered April 4, 2018.

Systematic Review: The Measurement Properties of the Suicidal Ideation Questionnaire and Suicidal Ideation Questionnaire-Jr.

OBJECTIVE: The Suicidal Ideation Questionnaire (SIQ) and the Suicidal Ideation Questionnaire-Junior (SIQ-Jr) were designed to capture suicidal ideation in adolescents and are often used in clinical trials. Our aim was to identify and appraise the published literature with respect to the validity, reliability, responsiveness, and interpretability of the SIQ and SIQ-Jr. METHOD: We conducted a systematic review following COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) guidelines to identify, appraise, and synthesize published literature on measurement properties and interpretability of the SIQ and SIQ-Jr. We searched MEDLINE, Embase, APA PsycINFO, CINAHL, Web of Science, and Scopus from inception to May 16, 2023, to identify sources relevant to our aim. RESULTS: We identified 15 sources meeting our eligibility criteria. The body of literature did not meet COSMIN standards to make recommendations for use with regard to these measurement instruments. CONCLUSION: Further research is needed, with a focus on content validity and structural validity, prior to recommending the SIQ and SIQ-Jr for use in clinical practice and in clinical trials. No specific grant funding was used for this review. PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: In this systematic review, authors analyzed 15 sources examining measurement properties of the Suicidal Ideation Questionnaire and Suicidal Ideation Questionnaire-Jr. Both measures are designed to capture suicidal ideation in adolescents and are used in clinical practice and clinical trials. The authors identified sufficient evidence for convergent validity for both measures. Authors concluded that further research is needed to support content validity, structural validity as a unidimensional scale (as they are often used) as well as their internal consistency, test-retest reliability, discriminative validity, predictive validity, and interpretability of these measures. The authors also emphasize the need to consider the limitations of these measures for researchers studying suicidal ideation and clinicians using these measures in their assessments of young people.

Discriminative validity and interpretability of the mood and feelings questionnaire.

BACKGROUND: Using the Mood and Feelings Questionnaire (MFQ) to differentiate between depression severity levels remains unexplored. We explored the discriminative validity of the MFQ to identify an optimal cut-off MFQ score to distinguish between subthreshold-to-mild and moderate-to-severe depression severity levels. METHODS: An observational cross-sectional design was used in a sample (N = 67) of help-seeking youth (ages 13 to 18, inclusive) experiencing depressive symptoms. The MFQ was administered verbatim to youth by a research analyst over the phone. Youth were then grouped into subthreshold-to-mild or moderate-to-severe depression severity categories based on scores received on the Kiddie Schedule for Affective Disorders and Schizophrenia-Depression Rating Scale. Receiver Operating Characteristic curve analyses were conducted, with area under the curve (AUC) and Youden Index (J) as primary indices. We hypothesized that the lower limit of the 95 % confidence interval for the area under the curve would be ≥0.70. RESULTS: The primary analysis yielded an AUC of 0.85 (95 % CI: 0.763-0.947) and an optimal cut-off of ≥43 (J = 0.60, positive predictive value = 91.4 %, negative predictive value = 62.5 %, sensitivity = 72.7 %, specificity = 87.0 %). LIMITATIONS: Our study collected a small sample, and as such cannot identify how subgroup classification (e.g., based on race or gender) may moderate outcomes. Further, unknown measurement error of the predictor and reference variable measures can bias the estimates. CONCLUSIONS: Our preliminary findings highlight the potential for the MFQ to support clinical decision-making relevant to adolescents experiencing varying severities of depressive symptoms in secondary care settings.

Evaluation of an automated matching system of children and families to virtual mental health resources during COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Children and their families often face obstacles in accessing mental health (MH) services. The purpose of this study was to develop and pilot test an electronic matching process to match children with virtual MH resources and increase access to treatment for children and their families during COVID-19. METHODS: Within a large observational child cohort, a random sample of 292 families with children ages 6-12 years were invited to participate. Latent profile analysis indicated five MH profiles using parent-reported symptom scores from validated depression, anxiety, hyperactivity, and inattention measures: (1) Average Symptoms, (2) Low Symptoms, (3) High Symptoms, (4) Internalizing, and (5) Externalizing. Children were matched with virtual MH resources according to their profile; parents received surveys at Time 1 (matching process explanation), Time 2 (match delivery) and Time 3 (resource uptake). Data on demographics, parent MH history, and process interest were collected. RESULTS: 128/292 families (44%) completed surveys at Time 1, 80/128 families (63%) at Time 2, and a final 67/80 families (84%) at Time 3, yielding an overall uptake of 67/292 (23%). Families of European-descent and those with children assigned to the Low Symptoms profile were most likely to express interest in the process. No other factors were associated with continued interest or uptake of the electronic matching process. Most participating parents were satisfied with the process. CONCLUSIONS: The electronic matching process delivered virtual MH resources to families in a time-efficient manner. Further research examining the effectiveness of electronically matched resources in improving children's MH symptoms is needed.

Oops, we missed a spot: Comparing data substitution methods for non-random missing survey data in a longitudinal study.

Imputation methods for missing data may not always be applicable, namely, when the data were completely missing for the whole sample. To estimate the missing data, we compared three missing item substitution methods: (1) mean substitution; (2) last observation carried forward (LOCF); and (3) regression-predicted values. A total of 384 parents reported their 8- to 18-year-old children's anxiety level using the 9-item Screen for Child Anxiety Related Disorders at baseline (Time 1) and two later time points, drawing from a larger longitudinal study (Ontario COVID-19 and Kids' Mental Health Study). We predicted a survey item measured one month after baseline (Time 2) using: (1) the mean value of the rest of the test items; (2) the value of the same item measured at baseline; and (3) the predicted value from the linear regression with all other test items as predictors. Within-Subjects ANOVA results showed a main effect of substitution methods on total score at Time 2. Post-hoc analysis indicated that mean substitution was significantly different from the actual data. Regression-predicted values overestimated the median compared to the actual values, while the LOCF estimation produced comparable means and identical medians. Similar results were found while using other indicators and extending the analysis to a larger 4-month time interval (Time 3), suggesting LOCF is more accurate and reliable than mean substitution or regression-prediction. This study proposes when advanced substitution methods are not applicable, a systematic comparison of alternative methods may help researchers to arrive at a more informed decision in data processing.

The Effect of Screen Time and Positive School Factors in the Pathway to Child and Youth Mental Health Outcomes.

Beyond achievement, educational settings offer informal supports that may be critical for child and youth mental health. However, children's educational environments have experienced significant disruption with the coronavirus pandemic. School settings offer unique opportunities to support children's mental health, but research must identify powerful points of intervention. This study examined school factors (aspirations, perceived competence, sense of belonging, and emotional engagement) as predictors of children's mental health, and the potential consequences of increasing screen time in and outside of school. Participants (N = 707) were parents and their children (6-18 years) from community and clinical settings who completed prospective surveys about children's school experiences and mental health symptoms (November 2020-May 2022). Standardized measures of depression, anxiety, irritability, inattention, and hyperactivity were collected. Structural equation modelling tested longitudinal associations between screen time, school factors, and mental health outcomes. Positive associations between each of the school factors (B = 0.14 [SE = 0.04] to B = 0.43 [SE = 0.04]) suggested they may reinforce one another. Longitudinally, sense of belonging and emotional engagement at school predicted lower severity for symptoms of depression, anxiety, irritability, and inattention (B=-0.14 [SE = 0.07] to B =-0.33 [SE = 0.10]). Greater screen time was associated with lower aspirations and perceived competence (B = - 0.08 [SE = 0.04] to B = - 0.13 [SE = 0.06]). Results suggest that school factors beyond achievement may be key correlates of child and youth mental health. While curriculum expectations emphasize academic achievement, an investment in supporting positive attitudes and aspirations at school is also warranted.

Systematic Review: Measurement Properties of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures Used to Measure Depression Symptom Severity in Adolescents With Depression.

OBJECTIVE: To systematically evaluate the measurement properties of 12 patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) used to measure depression symptom severity in adolescents with depression. Depression symptom severity was chosen as the outcome of focus given its importance as an outcome to measure in adolescents with depression across clinical trials and/or care. METHOD: MEDLINE, PsycInfo, Embase, Scopus, CINAHL, and Cochrane were searched from year of inception up to December 7, 2023. Study appraisal (ie, risk of bias), evaluation of measurement properties, and evidence synthesis followed the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) guidelines. Included studies evaluated at least 1 of 9 measurement properties as detailed in the COSMIN taxonomy within a reported sample or subgroup of youth ages 12 to 24 years, with at least 40% meeting criteria for any depressive disorder. RESULTS: Of the 15,560 records identified, 31 studies for 7 PROMs were included in the COSMIN appraisal. Although several PROMs have the potential to accurately measure depression symptom severity in adolescents with depression, at this time none of the PROMs can be recommended for use without further evaluative work. High-quality evidence was generally lacking, largely due to few or inconsistent findings, small sample sizes, and other methodological concerns. CONCLUSION: This systematic review of the measurement properties of 12 PROMs used to measure depression symptom severity in adolescents with depression found that none of the PROMs can be recommended for use until further evaluative work is conducted. Clinicians and researchers should proceed with caution when using these PROMs. DIVERSITY AND INCLUSION STATEMENT: One or more of the authors of this paper self-identifies as a member of one or more historically underrepresented racial and/or ethnic groups in science. One or more of the authors of this paper self-identifies as a member of one or more historically underrepresented sexual and/or gender groups in science. We actively worked to promote sex and gender balance in our author group. We actively worked to promote inclusion of historically underrepresented racial and/or ethnic groups in science in our author group. The author list of this paper includes contributors from the location and/or community where the research was conducted who participated in the data collection, design, analysis, and/or interpretation of the work.