Parental sensitivity and child behavioral problems: A meta-analytic review

Meta-analytic associations between observed parental sensitivity and child behavioral problems were examined (children aged 0-17 years). Studies (k = 108, N = 28,114) contained sociodemographically diverse samples, primarily from North America and Europe, reporting on parent-child dyads (95% mothers; 54% boys). Sensitivity significantly related to internalizing (k = 69 studies; N = 14,729; r = -.08, 95% CI [-.12, -.05]) and externalizing (k = 94; N = 25,418; r = -.14, 95% CI [-.17, -.11]) problems, with stronger associations found for externalizing. For internalizing problems, associations were significantly stronger among samples with low socioeconomic status (SES) versus mid-high SES, in peer-reviewed versus unpublished dissertations, and in studies using composite versus single scale sensitivity measures. No other moderators emerged as significant

Associations Between Screen Time and Child Internalizing and Externalizing Behaviour Problems: A Meta-Analysis

Background: Research on the effects of screen time on child outcomes has increased exponentially in response to the ubiquity of digital media. However, due to mixed findings, significant debate exists as to whether screen time is associated with problematic child outcomes, including internalizing and externalizing problems. It is important to understand the methodological differences that may be contributing to heterogeneity in findings and the possible risks and benefits of screen time to inform parents, clinicians, policy-makers, and future research. Objectives: To 1) meta-analytically determine the association between screen time (i.e., duration of use) and child externalizing and internalizing problems; 2) identify moderators that may contribute to discrepancies in the literature and point to areas for methodological improvement in future research. Method: Electronic searches were conducted in MEDLINE, Embase, and PsycINFO in June of 2019 and 22,528 non-duplicate articles were identified and screened for inclusion. Quantity of screen time was defined as the duration of time children spend viewing screens (e.g., television, tablets, video games, and/or computers, etc.). Child behaviour problems included externalizing (e.g., aggression, hyperactivity) and/or internalizing (e.g., depression, anxiety) behavioural symptoms or clinical diagnoses. Results: After screening all abstracts for inclusion, 434 full-text articles were assessed for eligibility and a total of 64 studies (with 74 unique samples; 85,225 participants) met all inclusion criteria. Results revealed that screen time was associated with more externalizing problems (k = 72, r = 0.12; 95% CI [0.10, 0.14]). Moderator analyses suggested that effect sizes were larger for males, in older studies, in studies examining aggression (vs. hyperactivity/inattention). Effect sizes were larger when the screen time informant was the child versus the parent. A separate meta-analysis revealed that screen time was also associated with more internalizing problems (k = 26, r = 0.07, 95% CI [0.04, 0.11]) and moderator analyses suggested that effect sizes were larger when the screen time informant was the child (vs. parent). Conclusions: These meta-analyses support small but significant associations between screen time and children’s behaviour problems. Methodological differences across studies were one of the most common contributors to mixed findings in the literature

Adverse childhood experiences and maternal anxiety and depression: a meta-analysis

Abstract Background It has been proposed that adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) can put women at risk for mental illness in the pregnancy and postpartum periods. While some studies have found strong support for this proposition, others have found weak or no support. This study is a meta-analysis of the association between ACEs and maternal mental health to resolve between-study discrepancies, and to examine potential moderators of associations. Methods Three electronic databases (i.e., MEDLINE, Embase, and PsycINFO) were searched up to November 2018 by a health sciences librarian. A hand search was conducted in January 2020 and relevant studies were added. Included studies reported on associations between ACEs and maternal depression and/or anxiety in the perinatal period (pregnancy to 1-year postpartum). Pregnancy and postpartum outcomes were examined separately for both depression and anxiety. Random-effect meta-analyses were conducted. Moderator analyses were conducted using meta-regression. Study quality was evaluated using a 15-point scale. Results The initial search yielded 4646 non-duplicate records and full text review occurred for 196 articles. A total of 15 studies (N = 7788) were included in the meta-analyses, of which 2 were also described narratively. Publication year ranged from 1998 to 2019. Mothers were approximately 28.93 years of age when they retrospectively reported on their ACEs. All studies had maternal self-report questionnaires for the mental health outcomes. Study quality ranged from 7 to 12. The pooled effect sizes between ACEs and prenatal (N = 12; r = .19; 95% CI= .13, .24) and postpartum (N = 7; r = .23; 95% CI = .06 to .39) depressive symptoms were significant. The pooled effect size between ACEs and prenatal anxiety was also significant (N = 5; r = .14; 95% CI= .07, .21). Moderator analyses indicated that timing of depressive and anxiety symptoms may be important for understanding associations. Conclusions ACEs confer risk to maternal mental health, albeit effect sizes are small to moderate in magnitude. Trauma-informed approaches, as well as increased mental health support during and after pregnancy, may help to offset the relative risk of ACEs on maternal mental health

When the Bough Breaks: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Mental Health Symptoms in Mothers of Young Children during the COVID-19 Pandemic

Parents have experienced considerable challenges and stress during the COVID-19 pandemic, which may impact their well-being. This meta-analysis sought to identify: 1) the prevalence of depression and anxiety in parents of young children (< age 5) during the COVID-19 pandemic, and 2) sociodemographic (e.g., parent age, minority status) and methodological moderators (e.g., study quality) that explain heterogeneity among studies. A systematic search was conducted across four databases from January 1st, 2020 to March 3rd, 2021. A total of 18 non-overlapping studies (9,101 participants), all focused on maternal mental health, met inclusion criteria. Random-effect meta-analyses were conducted. Pooled prevalence estimates for clinically significant depression and anxiety symptoms for mothers of young children during the COVID-19 pandemic were 27.4% (95% CI: 21.5-34.3) and 43.5% (95% CI:27.5-60.9), respectively. Prevalence of clinically elevated depression and anxiety symptoms were higher in Europe and North America and among older mothers. Clinically elevated depressive symptoms were lower in studies with a higher percentage of racial and ethnic minority individuals. In comparison, clinically elevated anxiety symptoms were higher among studies of low study quality and in samples with highly educated mothers. Policies and resources targeting improvements in maternal mental health are essential

Parental sensitivity and child behavioral problems: A meta-analytic review.

Meta-analytic associations between observed parental sensitivity and child behavioral problems were examined (children aged 0-17 years). Studies (k = 108, N = 28,114) contained sociodemographically diverse samples, primarily from North America and Europe, reporting on parent-child dyads (95% mothers; 54% boys). Sensitivity significantly related to internalizing (k = 69 studies; N = 14,729; r = -.08, 95% CI [-.12, -.05]) and externalizing (k = 94; N = 25,418; r = -.14, 95% CI [-.17, -.11]) problems, with stronger associations found for externalizing. For internalizing problems, associations were significantly stronger among samples with low socioeconomic status (SES) versus mid-high SES, in peer-reviewed versus unpublished dissertations, and in studies using composite versus single scale sensitivity measures. No other moderators emerged as significant