Student loneliness through the pandemic: How, why and where?

Loneliness has emerged as a problem for individuals and society. A group whose loneliness has recently grown in severity and visibility is students in higher education. Complementing media reports and surveys of students' lockdown loneliness, this paper presents qualitative research findings on students loneliness during the COVID-19 pandemic. It explores the how, why and where of student loneliness through research co-produced with undergraduate and postgraduate students. Student-researchers investigated loneliness as a function of relationships and interactions through self-interviews and peer interviews (n = 46) and through objects, chosen by participants to represent their experiences of lockdown. This research led to three conclusions, each with a geographical focus. First, as the spaces in which students live and study were fragmented, interactions and relationships were disrupted. Second, students struggled to put down roots in their places of study. Without a sense of belonging-to the city and institution where they studied, and the neighbourhood and accommodation where they lived-they were more likely to experience loneliness. Third, many students were unable to progress through life transitions associated with late adolescence including leaving home, learning social skills, forming sexual relationships and emerging into adulthood. Those facing bigger changes such as bereavement struggled to process these events and spoke of feeling 'neither here nor there'-in limbo. But students displayed resilience, finding ways to cope with and mitigate their loneliness. Their coping strategies speak to the efforts of policymakers and practitioners-including those in universities, government, health and wellbeing services, and accommodation services-who are seeking ways to tackle students' (and other peoples') loneliness.

Injury severity in pediatric all-terrain vehicle-related trauma in Nova Scotia.

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE: In 2004-2005, legislation restricting all-terrain vehicle (ATV) use by children and an extensive social marketing campaign intended to reduce pediatric ATV-related morbidity. The frequency, nature, and severity of pediatric ATV-associated trauma were compared before and after such interventions. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was performed for all pediatric ATV-related injuries that presented to the provincial level 1 pediatric trauma center from 1998 to 2014. National databases were queried for ATV-related injury hospitalizations (n=258), trauma center emergency department visits (n=342), and admissions (n=136) in Nova Scotia from 2002 to 2014. Admissions between 1998 and 2003 (n=68) and 2006-2014 (n=60) were compared using chi square analysis for age and gender distribution, length of stay, critical care admission, helmet use, mechanism, and severity of injury. RESULTS: Admissions, trauma center emergency room visits and admissions initially decreased following legislative and social marketing interventions and subsequently gradually increased. Interventions resulted in no significant difference in age or gender distribution, length of hospital stay, critical care admission, helmet use, and mechanism of injury. There was a significantly higher proportion of severe injuries post interventions. CONCLUSIONS: Legislation and social marketing interventions had a short-term decrease on the frequency of ATV-related injuries and no sustained effect on the frequency, nature, and severity of ATV-related injuries. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV.

Yet more pediatric injuries associated with all-terrain vehicles: should kids be using them?

BACKGROUND: Use of all-terrain vehicles (ATVs) has become a popular recreational activity for all ages, yet children suffer a markedly higher proportion of ATV-related injuries and deaths compared with the adult population. Evidence needs to be developed to direct policy to eliminate unnecessary injuries in this population. METHODS: A review of children younger than 16 years old admitted to a tertiary pediatric trauma center with ATV-related injuries over 12.5 years was conducted. Data included demographics, mechanisms of injury, use of helmets, and outcomes. RESULTS: Of 92 patients, 79% were male, the mean age was 12.1 years, 16% were under 10 years old, and 10% had attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (general population prevalence, 1-4%). Flipping/rolling was the most common mechanism of injury (32%) and was associated with sustaining chest and abdominal injuries (odds ratio, 3.7; 95% confidence interval, 1.1-12.9) and an increased Injury Severity Score (ISS). Only 4 of 20 patients with head/facial injuries were using helmets compared with 37 of 40 (odds ratio of head injury with helmet use, 0.02; 95% confidence interval, 0.004-0.101). Forty-five patients had more than one body system injured. The mean ISS was 7.0 (range, 1-35), and high scores were associated with sustaining head and/or truncal injuries. Fourteen percent of cases had an ISS greater than or equal to 12 and two patients died. The median length of stay was 3 days; 12% were admitted over 2 weeks. CONCLUSION: Children continue to sustain a large proportion of preventable and unnecessary injuries caused by ATVs. Although use of protective devices (i.e., helmets) diminishes the extent of injuries, children's smaller size relative to these large machines may contribute to flipping, rolling, and loss of control. Increased risk-taking by those with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder may also play a role. Efforts are needed to lobby for policies to limit the promotion and restrict the use of ATVs by children.