Establishing spirituality as an intermediary determinant of health among 42,843 children from eight countries

The World Health Organization (WHO) Commission on the Social Determinants of Health (CSDH) conceptual framework identifies socio-economic position as a structural determinant of health. Recognized intermediary determinants include biological, behavioural, and psychosocial factors. We examined whether connections afforded by a healthy spirituality potentially act as unrecognized intermediary determinants in adolescent populations, contributing to inequities in mental health. Reports from 42,843 children (21,007 boys, 21,836 girls) from eight countries who participated in the 2017–2018 Health Behaviour in School-aged Children (HBSC) study were used to describe correlations between family affluence and positive levels of mental health, using a cross-sectional design. Based on the CSDH conceptual framework and multivariable regression analyses, we then examined whether these associations were mediated by spiritual health. Connections afforded by a high level of spiritual health were universally correlated with positive mental health status. In three Western European nations (England, Scotland, and Wales) and Canada affluence was correlated with better mental health and this was partially mediated by spiritual health. Among the four Eastern European countries (Latvia, Lithuania, Moldova, Poland), our findings did not support aspects of the CSDH framework that focus on affluence as a direct determinant of health. Spiritual health potentially is an intermediary determinant of children's health in some Western countries, but not in Eastern countries. The universality of social determinants of health models and the measures used in their evaluation require careful assessment across cultures, political contexts, and health outcomes

Lessons learned from the Baltic countries' response to the first wave of COVID-19.

The Baltic countries of Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania shared a similar response to the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. Using the information available on the COVID-19 Health System Response Monitor platform, this article analyzed measures taken to prevent transmission, ensure capacity, provide essential services, finance the health system, and coordinate their governance approaches. All three countries used a highly centralized approach and implemented restrictive measures relatively early, with a state of emergency declared with fewer than 30 reported cases in each country. Due to initially low COVID-19 incidence, the countries built up their capacities for testing, contact tracing, and infrastructure, without a major stress test to the health system throughout the spring and summer of 2020, yet issues with accessing routine health care services had already started manifesting themselves. The countries in the Baltic region entered the pandemic with a precarious starting point, particularly due to smaller operational budgets and health workforce shortages, which may have contributed to their escalated response aiming to prevent transmission during the first wave. Subsequent waves, however, were much more damaging. This article focuses on early responses to the pandemic in the Baltic states highlighting measures taken to prevent virus transmission in the face of major uncertainties

Always Pay Attention to Which Model of Motor Learning You Are Using

This critical review considers the epistemological and historical background of the theoretical construct of motor learning for a more differentiated understanding. More than simply reflecting critically on the models that are used to solve problems—whether they are applied in therapy, physical education, or training practice—this review seeks to respond constructively to the recent discussion caused by the replication crisis in life sciences. To this end, an in-depth review of contemporary motor learning approaches is provided, with a pragmatism-oriented clarification of the researcher’s intentions on fundamentals (what?), subjects (for whom?), time intervals (when?), and purpose (for what?). The complexity in which the processes of movement acquisition, learning, and refinement take place removes their predictable and linear character and therefore, from an applied point of view, invites a great deal of caution when trying to make generalization claims. Particularly when we attempt to understand and study these phenomena in unpredictable and dynamic contexts, it is recommended that scientists and practitioners seek to better understand the central role that the individual and their situatedness plays in the system. In this way, we will be closer to making a meaningful and authentic contribution to the advancement of knowledge, and not merely for the sake of renaming inventions