Family functioning in the context of current and historical stressors: Exploring the buffering role of social support.

BACKGROUND: Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACEs) can be passed onto future generations through complex biopsychosocial mechanisms. However, social support in caregivers who have experienced adversity may lead to adaptation. Most research on the intergenerational consequences of ACEs has focused on mental health in subsequent generations, while overlooking family functioning as an outcome. OBJECTIVE: This pre-registered study addresses this gap by examining a hypothesized association between caregiver ACEs and caregiver-perceived family functioning, and the moderating role of social support. It was expected that high levels of social support would attenuate the association between caregiver ACEs and family functioning, controlling for contemporaneous stressors in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. PARTICIPANTS AND SETTING: Data come from a multinational non-clinical sample (n = 310). METHODS: Caregivers completed self-report measures to assess caregiver ACEs, social support, COVID stressors, and family dysfunction. RESULTS: Multiple regression analyses revealed that the ACEs-by-social support interaction was not significant. Exploratory analyses revealed a significant three-way interaction between COVID stressors, ACEs, and social support (b = 0.001, SE < 0.001, p = .008). For lower adversity, social support protected against the association between COVID stressors and family dysfunction; however, for higher adversity, social support was only protective when COVID stressors were low. CONCLUSIONS: Social support is protective against concurrent stressors during the pandemic in relation to family functioning, though this buffering depends on historical levels of adversity. Findings are interpreted through a trauma-informed lens and provide support for family-focused interventions and policies to mitigate the impact of stress on caregivers with high ACEs.

Parental mental health trajectories over the COVID-19 pandemic and links with childhood adversity and pandemic stress.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has created significant disruptions, with parents of school-age children being identified as a vulnerable population. Limited research has longitudinally tracked the mental health trajectories of parents over the active pandemic period. In addition, parents' history of adverse (ACEs) and benevolent (BCEs) childhood experiences may compound or attenuate the effect of COVID-19 stressors on parental psychopathology. OBJECTIVE: To identify distinct longitudinal trajectories of parental mental health over the COVID-19 pandemic and how these trajectories are associated with parental ACEs, BCEs, and COVID-19 stress. PARTICIPANTS AND SETTING: 547 parents of 5-18-year-old children from the U.K., U.S., Canada, and Australia. METHODS: Growth mixture modelling was used to identify trajectories of parental mental health (distress, anxiety, post-traumatic stress, and substance use) from May 2020 to October 2021. COVID-19 stress, ACEs, and BCEs were assessed as predictors of mental health trajectories via multinomial logistic regression. RESULTS: Two-class trajectories of "Low Stable" and "Moderate Stable" symptoms were identified for psychological distress and anxiety. Three-class trajectories of "Low Stable", "High Stable", and "High Decreasing" symptoms were observed for post-traumatic stress. Reliable trajectories for substance use could not be identified. Multinomial logistic regression showed that COVID-19 stress and ACEs independently predicted membership in trajectories of greater mental health impairment, while BCEs independently predicted membership in trajectories of lower psychological distress. CONCLUSIONS: Parents experienced mostly stable mental health symptomatology, with trajectories varying by overall symptom severity. COVID-19 stress, ACEs, and BCEs each appear to play a role in parents' mental health during this unique historical period.

Empirical support for a model of risk and resilience in children and families during COVID-19: A systematic review & narrative synthesis.

BACKGROUND.: The COVID-19 Family Disruption Model (FDM) describes the cascading effects of pandemic-related social disruptions on child and family psychosocial functioning. The current systematic review assesses the empirical support for the model. METHODS.: Study eligibility: 1) children between 2-18 years (and/or their caregivers); 2) a quantitative longitudinal design; 3) published findings during the first 2.5 years of COVID-19; 4) an assessment of caregiver and/or family functioning; 5) an assessment of child internalizing, externalizing, or positive adjustment; and 6) an examination of a COVID-19 FDM pathway. Following a search of PsycINFO and MEDLINE in August 2022, screening, full-text assessments, and data extraction were completed by two reviewers. Study quality was examined using an adapted NIH risk-of- bias tool. RESULTS.: Findings from 47 studies were summarized using descriptive statistics, tables, and a narrative synthesis. There is emerging support for bidirectional pathways linking caregiver-child functioning and family-child functioning, particularly for child internalizing problems. Quality assessments indicated issues with attrition and power justification. DISCUSSION.: We provide a critical summary of the empirical support for the model, highlighting themes related to family systems theory and risk/resilience. We outline future directions for research on child and family well-being during COVID-19. Systematic review registration. PROSPERO [CRD42022327191].

An ultra-brief systemic intervention to address child mental health symptomatology.

Drawing on decades of research in family systems, coparenting, and developmental science, we present a clinical approach to address unmet service needs in children's mental health. Specifically, we describe Lausanne Family Play - Brief Intervention (LFP-B) - a manualized family systems approach providing a caregiver-caregiver-child therapy (and sibling/s, when applicable). The LFP-B is ultra-brief, typically delivered in as few as three sessions (two assessment sessions followed by a video feedback session), with the aim of reducing children's mental health symptomatology by enhancing the coparenting relationship. We review literature on systemic family therapies and provide a rationale for including coparents and children in child mental health care. We then provide a rationale for using behavioral observations and video feedback in treatment, drawing on research in related family-based treatments (e.g., parent-child therapies). Finally, we provide an overview of the LFP-B manual and a case illustration.

Positive Parenting and Early Childhood Cognition: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

This review examines the effectiveness of positive parenting interventions aimed at improving sensitivity, responsiveness, and/or non-harsh discipline on children's early cognitive skills, in four meta-analyses addressing general mental abilities, language, executive functioning, and pre-academics. The objectives are to assess the magnitude of intervention effectiveness and identify moderators of effectiveness. We include randomized controlled trials of interventions targeting positive parenting to improve cognition in children < 6 years. Studies that include children with neurodevelopmental and/or hearing disorders were excluded. MEDLINE, PsycINFO, ERIC, and ProQuest Dissertations & Theses (October 2021) and citation chaining identified relevant records. Five reviewers completed screening/assessments, extraction, and risk of bias. Pooled analysis in Comprehensive Meta-Analysis (Version 3) used random effects modeling, with moderation via Q-statistics and meta-regression. Positive parenting interventions led to significant improvements in mental abilities (g = 0.46, N = 5746; k = 33) and language (g = 0.25, N = 6428; k = 30). Effect sizes were smaller and nonsignificant for executive functioning (g = 0.07, N = 3628; k = 14) and pre-academics (g = 0.16, N = 2365; k = 7). Robust moderators emerged for language and cognition. For cognition, studies with higher risk of bias scores yielded larger intervention effects. For language, studies with younger children had larger effect sizes. Studies mitigated selection and detection bias, though greater transparency of reporting is needed. Interventions that promote parental sensitivity, responsiveness, and non-harsh discipline improve early mental abilities and language. Studies examining executive functioning and pre-academics are needed to examine moderators of intervention effectiveness. Trial registration Systematic review PROSPERO registration. CRD42020222143.

The Family-Check-Up® Autism Implementation Research (FAIR) Study: protocol for a study evaluating the effectiveness and implementation of a family-centered intervention within a Canadian autism service setting.

Introduction: Prevalence rates of emotional and behavior problems (EBP) in autistic children and youth are high (40-70%), and often cause severe and chronic impairment. Furthermore, autistic children are also more likely to experience family "social-ecological" adversity compared to neurotypically developing peers, including social isolation, child maltreatment, caregiver mental illness, and socioeconomic risk. These family stressors increase the risk of co-occurring EBP among autistic children and can often impede access to evidence-based care, thus amplifying long-term health inequities for autistic children and their caregivers. In the current autism services landscape, there are few scalable, evidence-based programs that adequately address these needs. The Family Check-Up (FCU®) is a brief, strength-based, and tailored family-centered intervention that supports positive parenting and explicitly assesses the social determinants of child and family mental health within an ecological framework. Studies have demonstrated long-term positive child and caregiver outcomes in other populations, but the FCU® has not been evaluated in families of autistic children and youth. Therefore, we aimed to evaluate FCU® implementation within an established, publicly funded Autism Program in Ontario, Canada, with delivery by autism therapists, to demonstrate sustainable effectiveness within real-world settings. Methods: In this study, we outline the protocol for a hybrid implementation-effectiveness approach with two key components: (1) A parallel-arm randomized controlled trial of N = 80 autistic children/youth (ages 6-17 years) and high levels of EBP and their caregivers. Primary and secondary outcomes include child EBP, and caregiver well-being and parenting. (2) A mixed methods implementation study, to describe facilitators and barriers to implementation of the FCU® within an autism service setting. Discussion: Scalable, ecologically focused family-centered interventions offer promise as key components of a public health framework aimed at reducing mental health inequities among autistic children, youth, and their caregivers. Results of this study will inform further program refinement and scale-up.

Latent Classes of Adverse and Benevolent Childhood Experiences in a Multinational Sample of Parents and Their Relation to Parent, Child, and Family Functioning during the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACEs) are known to contribute to later mental health. Conversely, Benevolent Childhood Experiences (BCEs) may buffer against mental health difficulties. The importance of ACEs and BCEs for mental health of both parents and children may be most obvious during periods of stress, with potential consequences for functioning of the family. Subgroups of ACEs and BCEs in parents during the COVID-19 pandemic were investigated and validated in relation to indices of parent, child, and family well-being. In May 2020, ACEs/BCEs were assessed in 547 parents of 5-18-year-old children from the U.K., U.S., Canada, and Australia. Subgroups of parents with varying levels of ACEs and BCEs were identified via latent class analysis. The subgroups were validated by examining associations between class membership and indices of parent and child mental health and family well-being. Four latent classes were identified: low-ACEs/high-BCEs, moderate-ACEs/high-BCEs, moderate-ACEs/low-BCEs, and high-ACEs/moderate-BCEs. Regardless of the extent of BCEs, there was an increased risk of parent and child mental health difficulties and family dysfunction among those reporting moderate-to-high levels of ACEs. Parents' history of adversity may influence the mental health of their family. These findings highlight the importance of public health interventions for preventing early-life adversity.

Pandemic-Related Disruption and Positive Adaptation: Profiles of Family Function at the Onset of the Pandemic.

The onset of the pandemic brought heightened stress to parents due to disruptions to family life, in addition to processes of positive family adaptation, including greater closeness, more time spent together, and shared problem-solving. Delineating how early pandemic-related family stress and positive adaptation simultaneously operate is important for understanding risk and resilience. We use a person-oriented approach to identify subgroups of caregivers based on patterns of stress and positive adaptation in the first months of the pandemic. Data come from a multi-national study of 549 caregivers (68% female) of 1098 children (younger child: M = 9.62, SD = 3.21; older child: M = 11.80, SD = 3.32). In May 2020, caregivers reported on stress (income, family, and pandemic-specific) and positive adaptation using previously validated scales, and covariates indexing family vulnerabilities (i.e., caregiver adverse childhood experiences, caregiver and child mental health) and psychosocial resources (caregiver social support, positive coping, religiosity/spirituality, and benevolent childhood experiences, and pre-pandemic socioeconomic resources). A latent profile analysis was conducted using the four indicators. Profiles were examined in relation to covariates using BCH procedures. A 4-profile solution was selected, characterized by Low Disruption (n = 296), Multi-Domain Disruption (n = 36), Income Disruption (n = 111), and Family Disruption (n = 106) groups. Positive adaptation minimally differentiated profiles. Participants in the Low Disruption group reported more resources and fewer vulnerabilities than other groups. Those in the Multi-Domain Disruption group reported the fewest resources and the most vulnerabilities. Early in the pandemic, a minority group of individuals in this sample carried a disproportionate burden of pandemic-related stress. Potential consequences to family functioning and implications for systemic family prevention and intervention efforts are discussed. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s42844-022-00077-7.

Assessing positive adaptation during a global crisis: The development and validation of the family positive adaptation during COVID-19 scale.

The COVID-19 pandemic has negatively impacted the psychosocial functioning of children and families. It is important to consider adversity in relation to processes of positive adaptation. To date, there are no empirically validated multi-item scales measuring COVID-related positive adaptation within families. The aim of the current study was to develop and validate a new measure: the Family Positive Adaptation during COVID-19 Scale (Family PACS). The sample included 372 female and 158 male caregivers (73% White-European/North American; median 2019 income = $50,000 to $74,999 USD) of children ages 5-18 years old from the United Kingdom (76%), the United States (19%), Canada (4%), and Australia (1%), who completed measures in May 2020. Participants responded to a 14-item survey indexing a range of perceived coping and adaptation behaviors at the beginning of the pandemic. An exploratory factor analysis yielded an optimal one-factor solution comprised of seven items related to family cohesion, flexibility, routines, and meaning-making (loadings from 0.44 to 0.67). Multigroup confirmatory factor analysis demonstrated measurement invariance across female and male caregivers, demonstrating that the factor structure, loadings, and thresholds did not vary by caregiver sex. There was evidence for concurrent validity with significant bivariate correlations between the Family PACS scores and measures of caregiver positive coping, parenting practices, couple satisfaction, and family functioning (correlations from 0.10 to 0.23), but not negatively-valenced constructs. Findings inform our conceptualization of how families have adapted to adverse pandemic-related conditions. Further, we provide preliminary support for the Family PACS as a practical tool for evaluating positive family adaptation during this global crisis, with implications for future widespread crises.

Love Together, Parent Together (L2P2): a protocol for a feasibility study of a conflict reappraisal writing intervention for interparental couples with young children.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has introduced or amplified stress and challenge within couples' relationships. Among those who are particularly vulnerable to heightened conflict and lower relationship satisfaction during this time are interparental couples with young children, whose relationships may have already been tenuous prior to the pandemic. Stress within the interparental relationship may have ripple effects on all family subsystems and child adjustment. The Love Together Parent Together (L2P2) program is a brief, low-intensity writing intervention adapted for parents of young children that was designed to reduce conflict-related distress and prevent declines in relationship satisfaction. Based on an original writing intervention by Finkel and colleagues, L2P2 has adapted the intervention duration and study population to be appropriate to the current global context. This study will examine the key feasibility metrics related to this adapted program with the goal of identifying problems and informing parameters of future pilot and/or main RCTs. METHODS: The current study is a non-randomized feasibility study, using a single-arm, pre-test/post-test design to primarily assess the feasibility of an evaluative RCT, and to secondarily assess the potential effects on outcomes to be used in a future RCT. Couples will be recruited through three community-based agencies with the goal of obtaining a socio-demographically diverse sample. The first 20 couples to enroll will be included. Baseline and post-intervention surveys will be conducted, and a writing intervention will take place (three 7-min sessions over the course of 5 weeks). The primary outcomes will be feasibility metrics of recruitment rates, appropriateness of eligibility criteria, sample diversity, retention, uptake, adherence, and acceptability. In addition, we will develop an objective measure of couple "we-ness" based on an analysis of writing samples. The secondary outcomes will include couples' measures (i.e., relationship quality, perceived partner responsiveness, self-reported responsiveness, conflict-related distress), and additional family outcomes (i.e., parent-child relations, parental/child mental health). Criteria for success are outlined, and failure to meet the criteria will result in adaptations to the measurement schedule, intervention design, recruitment approach, and/or other elements of the program. DISCUSSION: This feasibility study will inform several components of the procedures used for a subsequent pilot RCT, in which we will examine the feasibility of the methodology used to evaluate the program (e.g., randomization, attrition to follow-up assessment/across groups, and sample size estimation, preliminary effectiveness), as well as the main RCT, which will investigate the effectiveness of the intervention on primary outcome measures and mediating pathways. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT05143437.

COVID-19 disruption gets inside the family: A two-month multilevel study of family stress during the pandemic.

Developmental research during COVID-19 suggests that pandemic-related disruptions in family relationships are associated with children's mental health. Most of this research has focused on 1 child per family, thereby obfuscating patterns that are differentially operative at the family-wide (i.e., between-family) versus child-specific (i.e., within-family) levels of analysis. Thus, the current study evaluates multilevel, longitudinal associations between COVID-19 disruption, family relationships, and caregiver/child mental health using a sibling comparison methodology. Caregivers (N = 549 families with 1098 children between 5 and 18 years old) were recruited from the Prolific research panel (73% White-European; 68% female; 76% United Kingdom, 19% U.S.A.; median 2019 income $50,000-$74,999). Caregiver reports of COVID-19 disruption, psychological distress, family functioning, parenting, and child mental health (for 2 children per family) were provided during May (time 1) and July (time 2) 2020. A Bayesian multilevel path analysis with random effects revealed: (a) families were experiencing difficulties across domains when COVID-19 disruption was high; (b) COVID-19 disruption corresponded to greater sibling differences in mental health; and (c) the sibling with poorer mental health received lower quality parenting over time, especially in families who reported higher levels of differential parenting. Findings suggest that understanding children's mental health difficulties during COVID-19 requires a family system lens due to the multiple ways these consequences permeate across the family unit. Comprehensive interventions for children's mental health during this time will likely require an examination of caregiver, sibling, and whole-family dynamics in the context of evidence-based telehealth practice. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

Effects of household chaos and parental responsiveness on child executive functions: a novel, multi-method approach.

BACKGROUND: Executive functions can be adversely affected by contextual risks in the home environment including chaos and parenting challenges. Furthermore, household chaos negatively influences parenting practices. Few studies, however, have examined the role of parenting in the association between household chaos and child executive functions. METHODS: Using a sample of 128 school-aged children (mean = 61.9 months, SD = 2.0, range 58-68 months) and their mothers, the present study examined direct and indirect effects (via parental responsiveness) of household chaos on child executive functioning. Multi-measures were used including performance-based assessments, behavioural observations, questionnaires, and video-home tours. RESULTS: Household chaos had both a direct effect on child executive functions (ß = - .31, 95% CI [- .58, - .04]) and an indirect effect (ß = - .05, 95% [- .13, - .01]) via parental responsiveness. Further, the indirect effect was only significant for household instability. CONCLUSION: These findings indicate that parental responsiveness may be compromised by household chaos, with implications for the executive functions of school-aged children. Preventative strategies are needed to improve the stability in the home and strengthen parenting practices.

The causal influence of responsive parenting behaviour on academic readiness: a protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: Children's academic readiness has important implications for subsequent achievement and psychosocial functioning. A growing number of studies are utilizing randomized controlled trials (RCT) to examine whether responsive parenting interventions lead to positive gains in children's academic readiness. A synthesis of the extant literature is warranted to gain a precise estimate of the causal influence of responsive parenting on academic readiness, as well as to examine moderators that may serve to strengthen or weaken this effect. The main objective of this study will be to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs evaluating the use of responsive parenting interventions to target academic readiness: problem-solving/reasoning, language proficiency, executive functioning, and pre-academic skills (e.g., numeracy/literacy). METHODS: Studies that took place in the early childhood period (< 6 years at baseline), targeted responsive parenting behaviours using an RCT (with control group, waitlist, or treatment as usual as a comparator), and included an outcome assessment of academic readiness will be considered for eligibility. Children and/or parents with special needs and/or disabilities will be excluded. The primary outcome is the effect of responsive parenting interventions on academic readiness. Secondary outcomes include substantive and methodological moderators and parent-mediated effects on outcomes. We will search MEDLINE, PsycINFO, ERIC, and ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global databases from their inception onwards and we will also conduct backward/forward searching of eligible studies. Published and unpublished works will be considered. Screening, full-text assessments, and data extraction will be completed by two independent reviewers. Risk of bias will be assessed using the CLARITY tool for RCTs. Effect sizes will be calculated based on study-level standardized differences between experimental and control groups and entered into random effects models to obtain a pooled effect (meta-analysis). Moderation will be examined through Q-statistics and meta-regression to study sources of between-study variation in effect sizes. A pooled path model of mediation will be used to study parent-mediated effects. DISCUSSION: Findings will illuminate causal relations between responsive parenting and academic readiness, with implications for developmental science. Findings will also guide decision making in policy and practice for supporting early childhood development and reducing social disparities in children prior to school-entry. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42020222143 .

The COVID-19 Family Stressor Scale: Validation and Measurement Invariance in Female and Male Caregivers.

The COVID-19 pandemic has raised significant concerns regarding the effect of social disruptions on parental mental health, family well-being, and children's adjustment. Due to the pace of the pandemic, measures of pandemic-related disruption have not been subject to rigorous empirical validation. To address this gap, a multi-national sample (United Kingdom, 76%; United States, 19%; Canada, 4%, and Australia, 1%) of 372 female caregivers and 158 male caregivers of 5-18-year-old children was recruited online. Participants completed a survey including a 25-item scale indexing disruption in finances, basic needs, personal and family welfare, career/education, household responsibilities, and family relationships related to the pandemic. An exploratory factor analysis yielded an optimal three-factor solution: factors included Income Stress (five items related to income, debt, and job loss; loadings ranged from 0.57 to 0.91), Family Stress (seven items related to family altercations and child management; loadings from 0.57 to 0.87), and Chaos Stress (four items related to access to supplies, crowded shopping areas, news coverage; loadings from 0.53 to 0.70). Multiple-group confirmatory factor analysis demonstrated measurement invariance of each factor across female and male caregivers, indicating that factor structure, loadings, and thresholds were equivalent across groups. Composites reflective of each factor were computed, and Mann-Whitney U tests indicated that female caregivers consistently scored higher than male caregivers on COVID-19 stressors related to income, family, and chaos. Finally, concurrent validity was demonstrated by significant bivariate correlations between each scale and caregiver, family, and child outcomes, respectively. This demonstrates the validity of the COVID-19 Family Stressor Scale for use with female and male caregivers in family-based research. The current sample was predominantly White-European, married/common-law, and had at least some post-secondary education. Additional sampling and validation efforts are required across diverse ethnic/racial and socioeconomic groups.

From screen time to the digital level of analysis: a scoping review of measures for digital media use in children and adolescents.

OBJECTIVES: This scoping review aims to facilitate psychometric developments in the field of digital media usage and well-being in young people by (1) identifying core concepts in the area of "screen time" and digital media use in children, adolescents, and young adults, (2) synthesising existing research paradigms and measurement tools that quantify these dimensions, and (3) highlighting important areas of need to guide future measure development. DESIGN: A scoping review of 140 sources (126 database, 14 grey literature) published between 2014 and 2019 yielded 162 measurement tools across a range of domains, users, and cultures. Database sources from Ovid MEDLINE, PsycINFO and Scopus were extracted, in addition to grey literature obtained from knowledge experts and organisations relevant to digital media use in children. To be included, the source had to: (1) be an empirical investigation or present original research, (2) investigate a sample/target population that included children or young persons between the ages of 0 and 25 years of age, and (3) include at least one assessment method for measuring digital media use. Reviews, editorials, letters, comments and animal model studies were all excluded. MEASURES: Basic information, level of risk of bias, study setting, paradigm, data type, digital media type, device, usage characteristics, applications or websites, sample characteristics, recruitment methods, measurement tool information, reliability and validity. RESULTS: Significant variability in nomenclature surrounding problematic use and criteria for identifying clinical impairment was discovered. Moreover, there was a paucity of measures in key domains, including tools for young children, whole families, disadvantaged groups, and for certain patterns and types of usage. CONCLUSION: This knowledge synthesis exercise highlights the need for the widespread development and implementation of comprehensive, multi-method, multilevel, and multi-informant measurement suites.

The disparate impact of COVID-19 on the mental health of female and male caregivers.

Caregiver mental health is crucial to the wellbeing of children. This is most apparent when caregivers face high levels of stress or life adversity. To study this phenomenon in the current global context, this study examined the relation between stress/disruption from the COVID-19 pandemic and the mental health of female and male caregivers. Pre-pandemic childhood adversity was considered as a moderator of this association. A multi-national sample (United Kingdom, 76%; United States, 19%; Canada, 4%, and Australia, 1%) was recruited in May 2020, of whom 348 female and 143 male caregivers of 5-18 year-old children provided data on the constructs of interest. At this time, caregivers reported on their history of adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) and COVID stress/disruption. About two months later (July 2020) caregiver mental health was evaluated. We examined differences between female and male caregivers on ACEs, COVID stress/disruption, and mental health (distress, anxiety, substance use, and posttraumatic stress). Main and interactive effects of ACEs and COVID stress/disruption on each mental health outcome were examined. Female caregivers reported higher COVID stress/disruption, more ACEs, and greater distress, anxiety, and posttraumatic stress symptoms compared to male caregivers. Among female caregivers, higher COVID stress/disruption and more adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) independently predicted all mental health outcomes, consistent with a stress accumulation model. Among male caregivers, a pattern of interactions between COVID stress/disruption and ACEs suggested that the effects of COVID stress/disruption on mental health was stronger for those with higher ACEs, especially for substance use, consistent with a stress sensitization model. Higher levels of stress and mental health difficulties among female caregivers suggests a disproportionate burden due to pandemic-related disruption compared to male caregivers. Findings speak to the disparate effects of COVID-19 on the mental health of female compared to male caregivers, and the role of pre-existing vulnerabilities in shaping current adaptation.

Linking Quality and Quantity of Parental Linguistic Input to Child Language Skills: A Meta-Analysis.

This meta-analysis examined associations between the quantity and quality of parental linguistic input and children's language. Pooled effect size for quality (i.e., vocabulary diversity and syntactic complexity; k = 35; N = 1,958; r = .33) was more robust than for quantity (i.e., number of words/tokens/utterances; k = 33; N = 1,411; r = .20) of linguistic input. For quality and quantity of parental linguistic input, effect sizes were stronger when input was observed in naturalistic contexts compared to free play tasks. For quality of parental linguistic input, effect sizes also increased as child age and observation length increased. Effect sizes were not moderated by socioeconomic status or child gender. Findings highlight parental linguistic input as a key environmental factor in children's language skills.

The application of positive parenting interventions to academic school readiness: A scoping review.

BACKGROUND: Positive parenting interventions were traditionally developed for use in infant and preschool mental health. However, there is increasing application to a broader range of developmental outcomes. A scoping review was conducted to map the landscape of the diverse applications of positive parenting interventions to academic school readiness. METHODS: Positive parenting interventions that took place in the early childhood period (prenatal to 6 years) and included an assessment of academic readiness were eligible (i.e., problem-solving/reasoning, language, executive functions and preacademics). The search strategy included four electronic databases from inception to July 2020 and backward/forward searching of the majority of eligible studies. Data charting was completed by double, independent reviewers and included theoretical frameworks, academic readiness outcomes, parenting behaviour targets, populations serviced and methodological approaches used. The synthesis included quantitative descriptives and tabular/visual representations. RESULTS: Ninety-nine studies met eligibility criteria. There has been a steady increase in published studies since 2005, with each academic readiness skill represented in varying proportions. Attachment theory was the most commonly referenced framework for applying interventions to academic readiness, with a more recent shift towards biobehavioural frameworks. The majority of studies included parental responsiveness as a parent behaviour target, whereas behavioural management was more commonly used with older children and/or those with social-emotional/behavioural difficulties. Most studies used a selective prevention approach, with low socioeconomic families being the most frequently studied group. Research gaps were identified in the measurement of follow-up and parenting behaviour. CONCLUSION: We discuss changing conceptualizations of academic readiness, applications to public health and practice, and future directions in research.