Editorial Statement About JCCAP’s 2023 Special Issue on Informant Discrepancies in Youth Mental Health Assessments: Observations, Guidelines, and Future Directions Grounded in 60 Years of Research

Issue 1 of the 2011 Volume of the Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology (JCCAP) included a Special Section about the use of multi-informant approaches to measure child and adolescent (i.e., hereafter referred to collectively as “youth”) mental health (De Los Reyes, 2011). Researchers collect reports from multiple informants or sources (e.g., parent and peer, youth and teacher) to estimate a given youth’s mental health. The 2011 JCCAP Special Section focused on the most common outcome of these approaches, namely the significant discrepancies that arise when comparing estimates from any two informant’s reports (i.e., informant discrepancies). These discrepancies appear in assessments conducted across the lifespan (Achenbach, 2020). That said, JCCAP dedicated space to understanding informant discrepancies, because they have been a focus of scholarship in youth mental health for over 60 years (e.g., Achenbach et al., 1987; De Los Reyes & Kazdin, 2005; Glennon & Weisz, 1978; Kazdin et al., 1983; Kraemer et al., 2003; Lapouse & Monk, 1958; Quay et al., 1966; Richters, 1992; Rutter et al., 1970; van der Ende et al., 2012). Thus, we have a thorough understanding of the areas of research for which they reliably appear when clinically assessing youth. For instance, intervention researchers observe informant discrepancies in estimates of intervention effects within randomized controlled trials (e.g., Casey & Berman, 1985; Weisz et al., 2017). Service providers observe informant discrepancies when working with individual clients, most notably when making decisions about treatment planning (e.g., Hawley & Weisz, 2003; Hoffman & Chu, 2015). Scholars in developmental psychopathology observe these discrepancies when seeking to understand risk and protective factors linked to youth mental health concerns (e.g., Hawker & Boulton, 2000; Hou et al., 2020; Ivanova et al., 2022). Thus, the 2011 JCCAP Special Section posed a question: Might these informant discrepancies contain data relevant to understanding youth mental health? Suppose none of the work in youth mental health is immune from these discrepancies. In that case, the answer to this question strikes at the core of what we produce―from the interventions we develop and implement, to the developmental psychopathology research that informs intervention development

Coeficientes de digestibilidade aparente da proteína e energia de alguns ingredientes utilizados em dietas para o pintado (Pseudoplatystoma coruscans) Apparent digestibility coefficients of protein and energy of some ingredients used in diets for pintado, Pseudoplatystoma coruscans (Agassiz, 1829)

O presente trabalho foi desenvolvido com o objetivo de determinar os coeficientes de digestibilidade aparente da proteína e da energia dos principais alimentos utilizados na formulação de dietas para alevinos de pintado. Foram utilizados 600 alevinos com peso médio inicial de 9,80 ± 1,48 g e comprimento total médio de 13,00 ± 1,00 cm. Na coleta de fezes, foi utilizado o sistema de Guelph modificado. As 12 dietas-teste foram constituídas por 69,50% de uma dieta de referência, 0,50% de óxido de cromo (marcador inerte) e 30% do ingrediente estudado. Após receberem as dietas teste durante três dias, os peixes foram transferidos para os aquários de coleta (incubadoras de fibra de vidro de 80 litros de capacidade), onde as fezes foram coletadas em intervalos de meia hora. Com base nos coeficientes de digestibilidade da fração protéica, os alimentos que apresentaram maior aproveitamento para esse nutriente foram: farinha de peixe (84,14%), farelo de soja (67,10%), milho (64,18%) e farinha de vísceras de aves (61,25%). Foram observados valores razoáveis somente para a digestibilidade do conteúdo energético em metade dos ingredientes estudados; para as farinhas de peixe, milho, soja integral tostada e os farelos de soja, de trigo e de arroz, os coeficientes médios foram: 72,80; 57,39; 64,95; 61,66; 53,20 e 51,84%, respectivamente. A farinha de peixe foi o melhor ingrediente para o pintado (45,38% PD e 2790,42 kcal ED/kg), seguido do farelo de soja (30,86% PD e 2708,45 kcal ED/kg), da soja integral tostada (18,34% PD e 3121,06 kcal ED/kg), do milho (5,86% PD e 2691,53 kcal ED/kg) e do farelo de trigo (8,08% PD e 2265,13 kcal ED/kg).<br>The present work was developed in order to determine the protein and energy apparent digestibility coefficients of the principal ingredients used in the pintado juvenile diets. Six hundred juveniles with initial weight and total length means of 9.80 ± 1.48 g and 13.00 ± 1.00 cm, respectively, were used. The modified Guelph system was appraised to collect feces. All the twelve test diets were constituted of 69.50% of the reference diet, 0.50% of chromium oxide used as inert marker, and 30% of the ingredient tested. After three days of feeding with the test diets, fish were transferred to the collect aquariums, where feces were collected in intervals of 30 minutes. Using digestibility of the protein, ingredients with best results in this nutrient were fish meal (84.14%), soybean meal (67.10%), corn (64.18%) and chicken poultry by-product (61.25%). Was only observed reasonable values for energy digestibility in half of the ingredients tested; for fish meal, corn, soybean (whole, toasted) and soybean meal of wheat and rice, the mean coefficients values were: 72.80, 57.39, 64.95, 61.66, 53.20, and 51.84%, respectively. Fish meal was the best ingredient available for pintado juveniles diet formulation (45.38%DP and 2790.42 kcal DE/kg), followed by soybean meal (30.86%DP and 2708.45 kcal DE/kg), soybean (whole, toasted) (18.34%DP and 3121.06 kcal DE/kg), corn (5.86%DP and 2691.53 kcal DE/kg), and wheat meal (8.08%DP and 2265.13 kcal DE/kg)

A piscicultura e o ambiente: o uso de alimentos ambientalmente corretos em piscicultura Fish farming and the environment: the use of environmental friendly feeds in fish culture

Embora a ciência da nutrição de peixes esteja longe de estabelecer um padrão geral de exigências nutricionais, a necessidade de desenvolvimento de alimentos de baixo impacto poluente há muito faz parte da agenda das comunidades científica e empresarial internacional da aqüicultura. Não só é absolutamente possível formular alimentos ambientalmente corretos, como é necessário modelar a formulação destes alimentos. Porém, é necessária absoluta acurácia para atender formulações espécie-específicas, considerando-se as interações da biologia e fisiologia nutricional das espécies com os alimentos e com as variações abióticas do meio. O conhecimento disponível sobre as mais de 200 espécies de peixe produzidas comercialmente no mundo é ainda incipiente e os sistemas de produção de peixe, nos diferentes regimes de exploração, estão implantados em todas as condições ecológicas possíveis. Neste cenário, produzir rações ambientalmente corretas é, senão impossível, pelo menos muito difícil e depende da ação coordenada e positiva de produtores, indústria da alimentação, agências regulatórias, e instituições de ensino e pesquisa para definir os parâmetros necessários à consecução deste objetivo.<br>Although fish nutrition science is far from establishing general standards of nutritional requirements, the need for developing low impact feeds has long been included in the agenda of aquaculture's international scientific and business communities of. Not only is absolutely possible to formulate environmental friendly feeds, as it is necessary modeling the formulation of these feeds. However, it is necessary higher accuracy to develop species-specific formulations, considering interactions of the biology and nutritional physiology of the species with the feedstuffs and variations of abiotic environment. The knowledge on more than 200 species of commercially farmed fish is still incipient and fish production systems, in their most varied farming conditions, are set up in every possible ecological conditions. In this scenario, producing environmental friendly feeds is if not impossible, at least very, very difficult, depending on coordinated and positive action of producers, industry, regulatory agencies, and institutions of higher education and research to define the parameters needed to achieve this goal