Longitudinal Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Stress and Occupational Well-Being of Mental Health Professionals: An International Study.

BACKGROUND: Increased levels of occupational stress among health professionals during the COVID-19 pandemic have been documented. Few studies have examined the effects of the pandemic on mental health professionals despite the heightened demand for their services. METHOD: A multilingual, longitudinal, global survey was conducted at 3 time points during the pandemic among members of the World Health Organization's Global Clinical Practice Network. A total of 786 Global Clinical Practice Network members from 86 countries responded to surveys assessing occupational distress, well-being, and posttraumatic stress symptoms. RESULTS: On average, respondents' well-being deteriorated across time while their posttraumatic stress symptoms showed a modest improvement. Linear growth models indicated that being female, being younger, providing face-to-face health services to patients with COVID-19, having been a target of COVID-related violence, and living in a low- or middle-income country or a country with a higher COVID-19 death rate conveyed greater risk for poor well-being and higher level of stress symptoms over time. Growth mixed modeling identified trajectories of occupational well-being and stress symptoms. Most mental health professions demonstrated no impact to well-being; maintained moderate, nonclinical levels of stress symptoms; or showed improvements after an initial period of difficulty. However, some participant groups exhibited deteriorating well-being approaching the clinical threshold (25.8%) and persistently high and clinically significant levels of posttraumatic stress symptoms (19.6%) over time. CONCLUSIONS: This study indicates that although most mental health professionals exhibited stable, positive well-being and low stress symptoms during the pandemic, a substantial minority of an already burdened global mental health workforce experienced persistently poor or deteriorating psychological status over the course of the pandemic.

Case-controlled field study of the ICD-11 clinical descriptions and diagnostic requirements for Bodily Distress Disorders.

AIMS: Mental disorders characterized by preoccupation with distressing bodily symptoms and associated functional impairment have been a target of major reconceptualization in the ICD-11, in which a single category of Bodily Distress Disorder (BDD) with different levels of severity replaces most of the Somatoform Disorders in ICD-10. This study compared the accuracy of clinicians' diagnosis of disorders of somatic symptoms using either the ICD-11 or ICD-10 diagnostic guidelines in an online study. METHODS: Clinically active members of the World Health Organization's Global Clinical Practice Network (N = 1065) participating in English, Spanish, or Japanese were randomly assigned to apply ICD-11 or ICD-10 diagnostic guidelines to one of nine pairs of standardized case vignettes. The accuracy of the clinicians' diagnoses as well as their ratings of the guidelines' clinical utility were assessed. RESULTS: Overall, clinicians were more accurate using ICD-11 compared to ICD-10 for every presentation of a vignette characterized primarily by bodily symptoms associated with distress and impairment. Clinicians who made a diagnosis of BDD using ICD-11 were generally correct in applying the severity specifiers for the condition. LIMITATIONS: This sample may represent some self-selection bias and thus may not generalize to all clinicians. Additionally, diagnostic decisions with live patients may lead to different results. CONCLUSIONS: The ICD-11 diagnostic guidelines for BDD represent an improvement over those for Somatoform Disorders in ICD-10 in regard to clinicians' diagnostic accuracy and perceived clinical utility.

Predictors of Dissertation Publication in Clinical and Counseling Psychology.

A doctoral dissertation constitutes a student's original research and a novel contribution to scientific knowledge. Yet, few psychology dissertations, particularly in professional subfields, are published in the peer-reviewed literature, and the reasons for this are unclear. The present study investigated student, advisor, and doctoral program variables that might predict dissertation publication in professional psychology. Using a stratified random cohort sample of 169 Ph.D. dissertations in clinical and counseling psychology, we conducted exhaustive searches to determine whether dissertation studies were published in peer-reviewed journals within 0-7 years following their completion. Logistic regression models were estimated to test whether dissertation publication was predicted by student and advisor prior research productivity, dissertation length, and doctoral program's training emphasis, accreditation status, and subfield. Results indicated that dissertations that were supervised by more research-productive advisors and that were relatively brief (<180 pages) were significantly more likely to be published in peer-reviewed journals. No other predictors were significant. Results are discussed with regard to implications for training and mentorship. Faculty advisors who publish frequently might be more likely to attract research-oriented students, to mentor students in preparing a publishable dissertation, and/or to encourage students to publish their dissertation research. By systematically promoting research dissemination as part of doctoral research training, graduate programs and faculty mentors in clinical and counseling psychology could help facilitate students' sharing their dissertation findings with the scientific community.

An international survey examining the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on telehealth use among mental health professionals.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 has profoundly affected the work of mental health professionals with many transitioning to telehealth to comply with public health measures. This large international study examined the impact of the pandemic on mental health clinicians' telehealth use. METHODS: This survey study was conducted with mental health professionals, primarily psychiatrists and psychologists, registered with WHO's Global Clinical Practice Network (GCPN). 1206 clinicians from 100 countries completed the telehealth section of the online survey in one of six languages between June 4 and July 7, 2020. Participants were asked about their use, training (i.e., aspects of telehealth addressed), perceptions, and concerns. OUTCOMES: Since the pandemic onset, 1092 (90.5%) clinicians reported to have started or increased their telehealth services. Telephone and videoconferencing were the most common modalities. 592 (49.1%) participants indicated that they had not received any training. Clinicians with no training or training that only addressed a single aspect of telehealth practice were more likely to perceive their services as somewhat ineffective than those with training that addressed two or more aspects. Most clinicians indicated positive perceptions of effectiveness and patient satisfaction. Quality of care compared to in-person services and technical issues were the most common concerns. Findings varied by WHO region, country income level, and profession. INTERPRETATION: Findings suggest a global practice change with providers perceiving telehealth as a viable option for mental health care. Increasing local training opportunities and efforts to address clinical and technological concerns is important for meeting ongoing demands.

A global field study of the international classification of diseases (ICD-11) mood disorders clinical descriptions and diagnostic guidelines.

BACKGROUND: We report results of an internet-based field study evaluating the diagnostic guidelines for ICD-11 mood disorders. Accuracy of clinicians' diagnostic judgments applying draft ICD-11 as compared to the ICD-10 guidelines to standardized case vignettes was assessed as well as perceived clinical utility. METHODS: 1357 clinician members of the World Health Organization's Global Clinical Practice Network completed the study in English, Spanish, Japanese or Russian. Participants were randomly assigned to apply ICD-11 or ICD-10 guidelines to one of eleven pairs of case vignettes. RESULTS: Clinicians using the ICD-11 and ICD-10 guidelines achieved similar levels of accuracy in diagnosing mood disorders depicted in vignettes. Those using the ICD-11 were more accurate in identifying depressive episode in recurrent depressive disorder. There were no statistically significant differences detected across classifications in the accuracy of identifying dysthymic or cyclothymic disorder. Circumscribed problems with the proposed ICD-11 guidelines were identified including difficulties differentiating bipolar type I from bipolar type II disorder and applying revised severity ratings to depressive episodes. Clinical utility of ICD-11 bipolar disorders was found to be significantly lower than for ICD-10 equivalent categories. LIMITATIONS: Standardized case vignettes were manipulated to evaluate specific changes. The degree of accuracy of clinicians' diagnostic judgments may not reflect clinical decision-making with patients. CONCLUSIONS: Alignment of the ICD-11 with current research appears to have been achieved without sacrificing diagnostic accuracy or clinical utility though specific training may be necessary as ICD-11 is implemented worldwide. Areas in which the ICD-11 guidelines did not perform as intended resulted in further revisions.

Science, practice, and policy related to adverse childhood experiences: Framing the conversation.

Adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) detrimentally affect health outcomes in childhood, adolescence, and adulthood. Over the past 2 decades, the recognition of ACEs by scientists and professionals across disciplines, policymakers, and the public has evolved and expanded. Although the initial articulation of ACEs in Felitti et al.'s landmark study has formed the basis of subsequent investigations on the long-term impact of childhood adversities on health and health risk behaviors, a wider public health framework, inclusive of psychology and other social sciences, also shapes current conceptualizations, research, practice, and policies. This article provides an overview of the special issue Adverse Childhood Experiences: Translating Research to Action. Given the rapid expansion and widespread application of ACEs, this special issue was developed to articulate critical concepts, to demonstrate the significance and relevance of psychological research and practice, and to catalyze further efforts to develop effective programs and policies informed by science. The 15 articles included reflect the continuum of critical work being conducted in research, practice, intervention and prevention programs, and public policy and serve to synthesize the growing body of empirical evidence. The overarching themes that emerged are framed as 3 essential questions: (a) How broadly should ACEs be defined?, (b) How should ACEs be assessed?, and (c) How can ACEs science translate into high quality services? As illustrated in these articles, policy and practice applications deriving from psychology as a hub science can substantially benefit the health and mental health of children, adolescents, and adults. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

Taxonomy and utility in the diagnostic classification of mental disorders.

OBJECTIVE: One strategy for improving the clinical utility of mental health diagnostic systems is to better align them with how clinicians conceptualize psychopathology in practice. This approach was used in International Classification of Diseases 11th Revision (ICD-11) development, but its underlying assumption-a link between taxonomic "fit" and clinical utility-remains untested. METHODS: Using data from global mental health clinician samples (combined N = 5404), we investigated the association between taxonomic fit and clinical utility in mental disorder categories. RESULTS: The overall association between fit and utility was positive (r = 0.19) but statistically not different from zero (95% confidence interval [CI]: -0.06, 0.43) in this small sample (N = 39 ICD/DSM categories). However, a positive association became clear after correcting for outliers (r = 0.34 [0.05, 0.58] or higher). Further insights were apparent for specific diagnoses given their locations in the scatterplot. CONCLUSIONS: Results suggest a positive link between taxonomic fit and clinical utility in mental disorder diagnoses, highlighting future research directions.

Donald K. Routh (1937-2021).

Memorializes Donald K. Routh (1927-2021). He received a BA in English from the University of Oklahoma (1962), followed by a MS (1965) and PhD (1967) in psychology from the University of Pittsburgh. He completed his clinical internship at the Oklahoma Health Science Center (1967). Routh was board certified in clinical psychology by the American Board of Professional Psychology (1975). Pursuing an academic career, he rose through the ranks at the University of Iowa (1967-1970, 1977-1985), Bowling Green University (1970-1971), the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (1971-1977), and the University of Miami (1985-2002) where he served as Director of the clinical psychology program. He was a Fellow of APA and the Association for Psychological Science. Throughout his career, Don emphasized historical foundations of psychology as a scientific discipline and profession. He also affirmed the importance of advocacy for children, families, and those with developmental disabilities and chronic conditions. Two of his books were particularly important contributions: his edited Handbook of Pediatric Psychology (1988) covered a field where he was a pioneer, and Clinical Psychology since 1917 (1994) demonstrated his prowess as historian. He was elected President of the Society of Pediatric Psychology (now Division 54), the Section on Clinical Child Psychology (now Division 53), Division 37, Division 12, and Division 33. He chaired the Behavioral Medicine Study Section of the National Institutes of Health (1983-1985) and performed a multitude of American Psychological Association accreditation site visits. In 1998 he founded the International Society of Clinical Psychology. He was a Fellow of APA and the Association for Psychological Science. In recognition of his career contributions, he received Presidential Awards from Division 54 (1981), the Academy on Mental Retardation (2001), and the American Association on Mental Retardation (2002) as well as an APA Presidential Citation (2002), the Nicholas Hobbs Award from Division 37 (1996), and the Edgar A. Doll Award from Division 33 (2001). Postretirement, as further evidence of his scholarly curiosity, Don earned BA (2008) and MA (2011) degrees in History from the Florida Gulf Coast University. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

Diagnostic classification of irritability and oppositionality in youth: a global field study comparing ICD-11 with ICD-10 and DSM-5.

BACKGROUND: Severe irritability has become an important topic in child and adolescent mental health. Based on the available evidence and on public health considerations, WHO classified chronic irritability within oppositional defiant disorder (ODD) in ICD-11, a solution markedly different from DSM-5's (i.e. the new childhood mood diagnosis, disruptive mood dysregulation disorder [DMDD]) and from ICD-10's (i.e. ODD as one of several conduct disorders without attention to irritability). In this study, we tested the accuracy with which a global, multilingual, multidisciplinary sample of clinicians were able to use the ICD-11 classification of chronic irritability and oppositionality as compared to the ICD-10 and DSM-5 approaches. METHODS: Clinicians (N = 196) from 48 countries participated in an Internet-based field study in English, Spanish, or Japanese and were randomized to review and use one of the three diagnostic systems. Through experimental manipulation of validated clinical vignettes, we evaluated how well clinicians in each condition could identify chronic irritability versus nonirritable oppositionality, episodic bipolar disorder, dysthymic depression, and normative irritability. RESULTS: Compared to ICD-10 and DSM-5, ICD-11 led to more accurate identification of severe irritability and better differentiation from boundary presentations. Participants using DSM-5 largely failed to apply the DMDD diagnosis when it was appropriate, and they more often applied psychopathological diagnoses to developmentally normative irritability. CONCLUSIONS: The formulation of irritability and oppositionality put forth in ICD-11 shows evidence of clinical utility, supporting accurate diagnosis. Global mental health clinicians can readily identify ODD both with and without chronic irritability.

Historical Analysis: Editors' Reflections on 50 Years of the Journal of Pediatric Psychology.

OBJECTIVE: This article provides an historical perspective on the Journal of Pediatric Psychology (JPP) on the occasion of its 50th anniversary. METHODS: Former and current editors of JPP participated in a symposium at the 2019 Society of Pediatric Psychology Annual Conference (SPPAC), each highlighting prominent types of articles published during their terms, the influence of these papers over time, and their reflections on the next 50 years of the journal. Their presentations were summarized and integrated for this article. Additional data on editorial teams, special issues, and publication metrics over time are included. RESULTS: The data demonstrate changes over time in the growth, scope, and impact of JPP. The article also shows the consistency in areas of emphasis over time. Anticipated topics for the future were quite consistent across editors and included increased use of technology, broader attention to teams and approaches, and methodological advances as the field will continue to grow. CONCLUSIONS: This article provides an unusual collaboration among editors of JPP, providing an historical perspective on the journal's growth over time and anticipation of continued impact into the future.

Innovations and changes in the ICD-11 classification of mental, behavioural and neurodevelopmental disorders.

Following approval of the ICD-11 by the World Health Assembly in May 2019, World Health Organization (WHO) member states will transition from the ICD-10 to the ICD-11, with reporting of health statistics based on the new system to begin on January 1, 2022. The WHO Department of Mental Health and Substance Abuse will publish Clinical Descriptions and Diagnostic Guidelines (CDDG) for ICD-11 Mental, Behavioural and Neurodevelopmental Disorders following ICD-11's approval. The development of the ICD-11 CDDG over the past decade, based on the principles of clinical utility and global applicability, has been the most broadly international, multilingual, multidisciplinary and participative revision process ever implemented for a classification of mental disorders. Innovations in the ICD-11 include the provision of consistent and systematically characterized information, the adoption of a lifespan approach, and culture-related guidance for each disorder. Dimensional approaches have been incorporated into the classification, particularly for personality disorders and primary psychotic disorders, in ways that are consistent with current evidence, are more compatible with recovery-based approaches, eliminate artificial comorbidity, and more effectively capture changes over time. Here we describe major changes to the structure of the ICD-11 classification of mental disorders as compared to the ICD-10, and the development of two new ICD-11 chapters relevant to mental health practice. We illustrate a set of new categories that have been added to the ICD-11 and present the rationale for their inclusion. Finally, we provide a description of the important changes that have been made in each ICD-11 disorder grouping. This information is intended to be useful for both clinicians and researchers in orienting themselves to the ICD-11 and in preparing for implementation in their own professional contexts.

Global Collaborative Team Performance for the Revision of the International Classification of Diseases: A Case Study of the World Health Organization Field Studies Coordination Group.

Background/Objective: Collaborative teamwork in global mental health presents unique challenges, including the formation and management of international teams composed of multicultural and multilingual professionals with different backgrounds in terms of their training, scientific expertise, and life experience. The purpose of the study was to analyze the performance of the World Health Organization (WHO) Field Studies Coordination Group (FSCG) using an input-processes-output (IPO) team science model to better understand the team's challenges, limitations, and successes in developing the eleventh revision of the International Classification of Diseases (ICD). Method: We thematically analyzed a collection of written texts, including FSCG documents and open-ended qualitative questionnaires, according to the conceptualization of the input-processes-output model of team performance. Results: The FSCG leadership and its members experienced and overcame numerous barriers to become an effective international team and to successfully achieve the goals set forth by WHO. Conclusions: Research is necessary regarding global mental health collaboration to understand and facilitate international collaborations with the goal of contributing to a deeper understanding of mental health and to reduce the global burden of mental disorders around the world.

Antecedentes/Objetivo: El trabajo de equipo colaborativo en salud mental global presenta retos particulares, incluyendo la formación y el control de grupos internacionales integrados por profesionales multilingües y multiculturales con diferentes antecedentes en términos de entrenamiento, competencias científicas y experiencias vitales. El propósito del estudio fue analizar el funcionamiento del Grupo de Coordinación de Estudios de Campo (GCEC) de la Organización Mundial de la Salud (OMS) utilizando un modelo científico de entrada-proceso-salida (EPS) para mejorar la comprensión de los retos, limitaciones y logros del equipo en el desarrollo de la onceava revisión de la Clasificación Internacional de Enfermedades (CIE). Método: Se llevó a cabo un análisis temático de una colección de textos, incluyendo documentos del GCEC y cuestionarios cualitativos de preguntas abiertas, acordes con la conceptualización del modelo de rendimiento de equipos de entrada-proceso-salida. Resultados: El liderazgo y los miembros del GCEC experimentaron y superaron numerosas barreras para convertirse en un grupo internacional efectivo y lograr exitosamente los objetivos establecidos por la OMS. Conclusiones: Se requiere de investigación sobre la colaboración en salud mental global a fin de entender y facilitar las colaboraciones internacionales dirigidas a comprender a profundidad la salud mental y reducir la carga de los trastornos mentales en el mundo.

Clinical utility of ICD-11 diagnostic guidelines for high-burden mental disorders: results from mental health settings in 13 countries.

In this paper we report the clinical utility of the diagnostic guidelines for ICD-11 mental, behavioural and neurodevelopmental disorders as assessed by 339 clinicians in 1,806 patients in 28 mental health settings in 13 countries. Clinician raters applied the guidelines for schizophrenia and other primary psychotic disorders, mood disorders (depressive and bipolar disorders), anxiety and fear-related disorders, and disorders specifically associated with stress. Clinician ratings of the clinical utility of the proposed ICD-11 diagnostic guidelines were very positive overall. The guidelines were perceived as easy to use, corresponding accurately to patients' presentations (i.e., goodness of fit), clear and understandable, providing an appropriate level of detail, taking about the same or less time than clinicians' usual practice, and providing useful guidance about distinguishing disorder from normality and from other disorders. Clinicians evaluated the guidelines as less useful for treatment selection and assessing prognosis than for communicating with other health professionals, though the former ratings were still positive overall. Field studies that assess perceived clinical utility of the proposed ICD-11 diagnostic guidelines among their intended users have very important implications. Classification is the interface between health encounters and health information; if clinicians do not find that a new diagnostic system provides clinically useful information, they are unlikely to apply it consistently and faithfully. This would have a major impact on the validity of aggregated health encounter data used for health policy and decision making. Overall, the results of this study provide considerable reason to be optimistic about the perceived clinical utility of the ICD-11 among global clinicians.

Cardiac Phase Space Tomography: A novel method of assessing coronary artery disease utilizing machine learning.

BACKGROUND: Artificial intelligence (AI) techniques are increasingly applied to cardiovascular (CV) medicine in arenas ranging from genomics to cardiac imaging analysis. Cardiac Phase Space Tomography Analysis (cPSTA), employing machine-learned linear models from an elastic net method optimized by a genetic algorithm, analyzes thoracic phase signals to identify unique mathematical and tomographic features associated with the presence of flow-limiting coronary artery disease (CAD). This novel approach does not require radiation, contrast media, exercise, or pharmacological stress. The objective of this trial was to determine the diagnostic performance of cPSTA in assessing CAD in patients presenting with chest pain who had been referred by their physician for coronary angiography. METHODS: This prospective, multicenter, non-significant risk study was designed to: 1) develop machine-learned algorithms to assess the presence of CAD (defined as one or more ≥ 70% stenosis, or fractional flow reserve ≤ 0.80) and 2) test the accuracy of these algorithms prospectively in a naïve verification cohort. This report is an analysis of phase signals acquired from 606 subjects at rest just prior to angiography. From the collective phase signal data, features were extracted and paired with the known angiographic results. A development set, consisting of signals from 512 subjects, was used for machine learning to determine an algorithm that correlated with significant CAD. Verification testing of the algorithm was performed utilizing previously untested phase signals from 94 subjects. RESULTS: The machine-learned algorithm had a sensitivity of 92% (95% CI: 74%-100%) and specificity of 62% (95% CI: 51%-74%) on blind testing in the verification cohort. The negative predictive value (NPV) was 96% (95% CI: 85%-100%). CONCLUSIONS: These initial multicenter results suggest that resting cPSTA may have comparable diagnostic utility to functional tests currently used to assess CAD without requiring cardiac stress (exercise or pharmacological) or exposure of the patient to radioactivity.

The ICD-11 developmental field study of reliability of diagnoses of high-burden mental disorders: results among adult patients in mental health settings of 13 countries.

Reliable, clinically useful, and globally applicable diagnostic classification of mental disorders is an essential foundation for global mental health. The World Health Organization (WHO) is nearing completion of the 11th revision of the International Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems (ICD-11). The present study assessed inter-diagnostician reliability of mental disorders accounting for the greatest proportion of global disease burden and the highest levels of service utilization - schizophrenia and other primary psychotic disorders, mood disorders, anxiety and fear-related disorders, and disorders specifically associated with stress - among adult patients presenting for treatment at 28 participating centers in 13 countries. A concurrent joint-rater design was used, focusing specifically on whether two clinicians, relying on the same clinical information, agreed on the diagnosis when separately applying the ICD-11 diagnostic guidelines. A total of 1,806 patients were assessed by 339 clinicians in the local language. Intraclass kappa coefficients for diagnoses weighted by site and study prevalence ranged from 0.45 (dysthymic disorder) to 0.88 (social anxiety disorder) and would be considered moderate to almost perfect for all diagnoses. Overall, the reliability of the ICD-11 diagnostic guidelines was superior to that previously reported for equivalent ICD-10 guidelines. These data provide support for the suitability of the ICD-11 diagnostic guidelines for implementation at a global level. The findings will inform further revision of the ICD-11 diagnostic guidelines prior to their publication and the development of programs to support professional training and implementation of the ICD-11 by WHO member states.

"Are you gonna publish that?" Peer-reviewed publication outcomes of doctoral dissertations in psychology.

If a doctoral dissertation represents an original investigation that makes a contribution to one's field, then dissertation research could, and arguably should, be disseminated into the scientific literature. However, the extent and nature of dissertation publication remains largely unknown within psychology. The present study investigated the peer-reviewed publication outcomes of psychology dissertation research in the United States. Additionally, we examined publication lag, scientific impact, and variations across subfields. To investigate these questions, we first drew a stratified random cohort sample of 910 psychology Ph.D. dissertations from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses. Next, we conducted comprehensive literature searches for peer-reviewed journal articles derived from these dissertations published 0-7 years thereafter. Published dissertation articles were coded for their bibliographic details, citation rates, and journal impact metrics. Results showed that only one-quarter (25.6% [95% CI: 23.0, 28.4]) of dissertations were ultimately published in peer-reviewed journals, with significant variations across subfields (range: 10.1 to 59.4%). Rates of dissertation publication were lower in professional/applied subfields (e.g., clinical, counseling) compared to research/academic subfields (e.g., experimental, cognitive). When dissertations were published, however, they often appeared in influential journals (e.g., Thomson Reuters Impact Factor M = 2.84 [2.45, 3.23], 5-year Impact Factor M = 3.49 [3.07, 3.90]) and were cited numerous times (Web of Science citations per year M = 3.65 [2.88, 4.42]). Publication typically occurred within 2-3 years after the dissertation year. Overall, these results indicate that the large majority of Ph.D. dissertation research in psychology does not get disseminated into the peer-reviewed literature. The non-publication of dissertation research appears to be a systemic problem affecting both research and training in psychology. Efforts to improve the quality and "publishability" of doctoral dissertation research could benefit psychological science on multiple fronts.

Historical Analysis: The Journal of Pediatric Psychology From 1976 to 2015.

Objective: To provide a historical analysis through the examination of trends in type of articles, content areas, and population groups across all issues of the Journal of Pediatric Psychology (JPP). Method: All articles published in JPP between the years 1976-2015 were coded based on article type (e.g., original research, meta-analysis), content code (e.g., adherence, primary care), and population code (e.g., oncology, chronic and recurrent pain). Descriptive statistics were calculated. Results: The overall top article types, content codes, and population codes are described as well as top codes for each decade. Overall, the majority of articles were classified as original research. Although some population and content codes varied over time, there were some areas that were consistently present throughout issues, including family systems, cognitive/intellectual functioning, pediatric oncology, and type 1 diabetes. Many topics selected for special issues and topics were consistent with top population and content codes. Conclusions: Findings indicate that most top areas have consistently been present in JPP over the 39-year period. The current historical analysis highlights these patterns as well as serves as a historical record for JPP.

Irritability in child and adolescent psychopathology: An integrative review for ICD-11.

In preparation for the World Health Organization's development of the Eleventh Revision of the International Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems (ICD-11) chapter on Mental and Behavioral Disorders, this article reviews the literature pertaining to severe irritability in child and adolescent psychopathology. First, research on severe mood dysregulation suggests that youth with irritability and temper outbursts, among other features of hyperactivity and arousal, demonstrate cross-sectional correlates and developmental outcomes that distinguish them from youth with bipolar disorder. Second, other evidence points to an irritable dimension of Oppositional Defiant Disorder symptomatology, which is uniquely associated with concurrent and subsequent internalizing problems. In contrast to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders' (5th ed.) Disruptive Mood Dysregulation Disorder, our review of the literature supports a different solution: a subtype, Oppositional Defiant Disorder with chronic irritability/anger (proposal included in Appendix). This solution is more consistent with the available evidence and is a better fit with global public health considerations such as harm/benefit potential, clinical utility, and cross-cultural applicability. Implications for assessment, treatment, and research are discussed.

Advancing the Scientific Foundation for Evidence-Based Practice in Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology.

Evidence-based practice (EBP) has become a central focus in clinical child and adolescent psychology. As originally defined, EBP in psychology is the integration of the best available research evidence, patient characteristics, and clinical expertise. Although evidence-based perspectives have garnered widespread acceptance in recent years, there has also been some confusion and disagreement about the 3-part definition of EBP, particularly the role of research. In this article, we first provide a brief review of the development of EBP in clinical child and adolescent psychology. Next, we outline the following 4 points to help clarify the understanding of EBP: (a) knowledge should not be confused with epistemic processes, (b) research on clinician and client factors is needed for EBP, (c) research on assessment is needed for EBP, and (d) the 3-part conceptualization of EBP can serve as a useful framework to guide research. Based on these principles, we put forth a slightly revised conceptualization of EBP, in which the role of research is expanded and more clearly operationalized. Finally, based on our review of the literature, we offer illustrative examples of specific directions for future research to advance the evidence base for EBP in clinical child and adolescent psychology.

Commentary: The Wright Ross Salk Award: Worker Bees and Benefits to the Hive: Service Contributions to the Profession and Society of Pediatric Psychology.

This article reflects on service contributions upon receiving the 2016 Society of Pediatric Psychology Wright Ross Salk Distinguished Service Award. As the title implies, worker bees make service contributions for the overall benefit of the hive and colony. So too, the scientific discipline, clinical profession, and the Society of Pediatric Psychology need the service contributions of multiple individuals to survive and thrive. Many people have made professional contributions to benefit the field and its organizational home; many more worker bees will volunteer in the future to fill important service roles and sustain the hive. The article discusses lessons learned about service.