Bullying, social support and adolescents' mental health: Results from a follow-up study.

Aims: The aim of this study was to examine the predictive roles of being bullied and perceived social support in association with adolescents' mental health. Methods: At two time points, September 2016 and April-June 2017, questionnaires were distributed to students between 15 and 21 years of age in four upper-secondary schools in Norway, with a total sample size of 351. Random- and fixed-effects regression models were used to estimate the effects of being bullied and social support on adolescents' mental health. Results: In the random-effects models, being bullied was associated with lower scores on mental well-being and higher scores on anxiety and depression symptoms. Social support from family and friends was associated with higher scores on mental well-being, as well as fewer anxiety and depression symptoms. However, the results from the fixed-effects model, with more realistic assumptions, indicated that being bullied was only associated with more anxiety and depression symptoms, while support from friends was associated with higher scores on mental well-being and fewer anxiety and depression symptoms. Conclusions: Based on the fixed-effects models, being bullied was associated with more anxiety and depression symptoms. However, being bullied was not significantly associated with mental well-being. Social support from family was not significantly associated with either aspects of mental health. Moreover, social support from friends was associated with higher scores on mental well-being and fewer anxiety and depression symptoms. The two sources of social support did not buffer the negative effects of being bullied on either aspect of mental health.

Validation of two versions of the Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-Being Scale among Norwegian adolescents.

AIM: This study aimed to examine the psychometric properties of the original 14-item version of the Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-Being Scale (WEMWBS) and the short 7-item version (SWEMWBS) to validate these scales for use among Norwegian adolescents. METHOD: Cross-sectional data were collected by distributing questionnaires among students in five upper secondary schools in Norway with a net sample of n = 1814. Exploratory- and confirmatory factor analyses (CFA) and a reliability analysis were conducted and possible floor and ceiling effects were examined to evaluate the scales. A correlation analysis was conducted to examine criterion-related validity. RESULTS: The preliminary exploratory factor analysis gave strong indications of a one-dimensional solution for both versions of the scale. Furthermore, both scales showed high internal consistency (Cronbach's α = .93 for the WEMWBS and α = .88 for the SWEMWBS). The SWEMWBS showed the best fit in the CFA and a strong correlation with the WEMWBS ( r = .94). The score distributions of both scales indicated the possibility of a small ceiling effect. Both scales showed high correlations with related constructs in the expected direction. CONCLUSIONS: In our study, based on the CFA results and the high correlation between the original scale and the short version, the SWEMWBS was found to be most suitable for use among Norwegian adolescents.

Professional collaboration - support for children with cancer and their families - focus group interview - a source of information and knowledge - professionals' perspectives.

In this study, our aims were to evaluate a professional collaborative model and to explore professionals' perceptions of collaboration generally. Focus group interviews were performed with 18 health and non-health professionals caring for children diagnosed and treated for cancer. Collaboration was considered significant for professionals themselves and the families they work with. Focus group participants support the importance of arranging collaborative meetings at an early stage of the child's illness and the family's crisis. Many professionals, working in the child's home community, were alone with the responsibility for follow-up care, but only a few of these professionals received supervision. More frequent contact with the paediatric clinic was desired, as well as a more active role for the general practitioner. Professionals perceived the model as being a valuable support system for longterm planning of follow-up care, allowing parents to collaborate with the care team. It is essential however, to emphasize the importance of having well-established routines, as well as the use of a coordinator. This can be important for enhancing communication between professionals and for obtaining a well-functioning collaboration.

Quality of life in children and adolescents surviving cancer.

PURPOSE: To explore subjective and proxy reported QoL (Quality of Life) in children and adolescents surviving cancer three years after diagnosis compared with healthy controls. METHOD: Case-control study including 50 children and adolescents diagnosed with cancer between January 1, 1993 and January 1, 2003 and treated at the Paediatric Department of St. Olav's University Hospital in Trondheim, Norway. Data were collected using The Inventory of Life Quality in Children and Adolescents (ILC) and the KINDL QoL questionnaires (parent and self-reports), as well as by collecting data for any somatic late effects and psychological problems from the medical records of children surviving cancer. RESULTS: Adolescents surviving cancer as a group assessed their QoL as similar to that of their peers. However, adolescents surviving brain tumours or those with late effects reported lower QoL and an increased number of QoL domains perceived as problematic, even many years after diagnosis and treatment. Parents generally report a poorer QoL for their children surviving cancer and a greater number of QoL domains experienced as problematic compared with parent controls. CONCLUSION: To improve the child's total functioning and well-being we conclude that when planning long-term follow-up care, rehabilitation of children and adolescents with cancer, especially for survivors with brain tumours, and with late effects should particularly take into account their subjectively perceived and proxy reported QoL, in addition to their psychological problems and psychosocial functioning.