Opportunities for improving data sharing and FAIR data practices to advance global mental health–Corrigendum

This corrects the article DOI: 10.1017/gmh.2023.7</p

Opportunities for improving data sharing and FAIR data practices to advance global mental health

It is crucial to optimize global mental health research to address the high burden of mental health challenges and mental illness for individuals and societies. Data sharing and reuse have demonstrated value for advancing science and accelerating knowledge development. The FAIR (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, and Reusable) Guiding Principles for scientific data provide a framework to improve the transparency, efficiency, and impact of research. In this review, we describe ethical and equity considerations in data sharing and reuse, delineate the FAIR principles as they apply to mental health research, and consider the current state of FAIR data practices in global mental health research, identifying challenges and opportunities. We describe noteworthy examples of collaborative efforts, often across disciplinary and national boundaries, to improve Findability and Accessibility of global mental health data, as well as efforts to create integrated data resources and tools that improve Interoperability and Reusability. Based on this review, we suggest a vision for the future of FAIR global mental health research and suggest practical steps for researchers with regard to study planning, data preservation and indexing, machine-actionable metadata, data reuse to advance science and improve equity, metrics and recognition

Latent classes of DSM-5 acute stress disorder symptoms in children after single-incident trauma: findings from an international data archive

Background: After a potentially traumatic event (PTE), children often show symptoms of acute stress disorder (ASD), which may evolve into posttraumatic stress (PTS) disorder. A growing body of literature has employed latent class analysis (LCA) to disentangle the complex structure underlying PTS symptomatology, distinguishing between homogeneous subgroups based on PTS presentations. So far, little is known about subgroups or classes of ASD reactions in trauma-exposed children. Objective: Our study aimed to identify latent classes of ASD symptoms in children exposed to a single-incident PTE and to identify predictors of class membership (gender, age, cultural background, parental education, trauma type, and trauma history). Method: A sample of 2287 children and adolescents (5–18 years) was derived from the Prospective studies of Acute Child Trauma and Recovery (PACT/R) Data Archive, an international archive including studies from the USA, UK, Australia, and Switzerland. LCA was used to determine distinct subgroups based on ASD symptoms. Predictors of class membership were examined using a three-step approach. Results: Our LCA yielded a three-class solution: low (42%), intermediate (43%) and high (15%) ASD symptom severity that differed in terms of impairment and number of endorsed ASD symptoms. Compared to the low symptoms class, children in the intermediate or high severity class were more likely to be of female gender, be younger of age, have parents who had not completed secondary education, and be exposed to a road traffic accident or interpersonal violence (vs. an unintentional injury). Conclusions: These findings provide new information on children at risk for ASD after single-incident trauma,

Families following pediatric traumatic medical events: identifying psychosocial risk profiles using latent profile analysis

Background: Post-traumatic stress symptoms (PTSS) are often experienced by children and family members after pediatric traumatic medical events (PTMEs). Assessing families’ psychosocial risk factors is a crucial part of trauma-informed practice as it helps identify risk for PTSS in the aftermath of PTME. Objectives: Using the Psychosocial Assessment Tool 2.0 (PAT2.0), this study describes the psychosocial risk of families following PTMEs in two ways: 1. Describing the psychosocial risk defined by the PAT2.0 based on three-tiered risk levels; 2. Using latent profile analysis (LPA); identifying psychosocial risk profiles and examining how child- and injury-related factors can affect profile membership. Methods: Caregivers of 374 children following PTMEs admitted to a pediatric rehabilitation department in Israel completed the PAT2.0. Total PAT2.0 score and the seven PAT2.0 subscales (family structure/resources, social support, child problems, sibling problems, family problems, caregiver stress reactions, and family beliefs) were included in the first analysis. Mean PAT2.0 scores of three risk categories (universal, targeted, clinical) were calculated; LPA, which allows for cross-sectional latent variable mixture models to identify heterogeneity within a population, and multinomial logistic regressions using six out of the seven PAT2.0 subscales, were used to determine distinct profile differences and predictors of profile membership. Results: The three-tiered risk levels revealed were relatively high, as compared to levels in families of children with other clinical diagnoses. LPA yielded a three-profile solution: low family risk (63.53%); high caregiver stress, above-average levels of family risk (22.5%); and sibling problems, above-average levels of family risk (13.94%). Ethnicity and type of injury predicted group membership. Conclusion: Families of children following PTMEs are at increased psychosocial risk. A clinically useful approach to identifying and preventing PTSS may be to evaluate specific domain patterns rather than just the total PAT2.0 risk level alone, based on the PAT2.0 subscales

Making your data count : practical tips and tools for FAIR data across the research lifecycle

Making our research data FAIR (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, Re‐usable) is increasingly important for the field, and can broaden the impact of one’s work. Yet many of us struggle to understand what FAIR data practices would look like for our own research teams and how these practices can fit into existing workflows without adding substantial time/effort. This workshop will focus on practical tips for making one’s research practices more FAIR, and potential benefits for the researcher. Workshop leaders are active in the Global Collaboration on Traumatic Stress (GCTS) FAIR Data Workgroup. We will provide an overview of FAIR data principles and highlights of a recent GCTS survey of trauma researchers about data sharing and re‐use. Three brief presentations will address FAIR practices at different points in the research lifecycle, with examples and links to additional learning resources: ethics and consent for FAIR data (Denejkina), how and where to share data (Hruska), and preparing data for re‐use by yourself and others (Kassam‐Adams). Facilitated by GCTS FAIR Data Workgroup members, interactive breakout groups will discuss feasible ways to make one’s practices more FAIR. Workshop participants are invited to bring their questions and their own materials (eg, consent forms, data dictionaries, data management plans, funder/journal data‐sharing requirements) for discussion

Transition to Multidisciplinary Pediatric Telerehabilitation during the COVID-19 Pandemic: Strategy Development and Implementation

Telerehabilitation offers a unique solution for continuity of care in pediatric rehabilitation under physical distancing. The major aims of this study were to: (1) describe the development of telerehabilitation usage guidelines in a large hospital in Israel, and to (2) evaluate the implementation of telerehabilitation from the perspectives of healthcare practitioners and families. An expert focus group developed guidelines which were disseminated to multidisciplinary clinicians. Following sessions, clinicians filled The Clinician Evaluation of Telerehabilitation Service (CETS), a custom-built feedback questionnaire on telerehabilitation, and parents completed the client version of the Therapist Presence Inventory (TPI-C) and were asked to rate the effectiveness of sessions on an ordinal scale. Four goals of telerehabilitation sessions were defined: (1) maintenance of therapeutic alliance, (2) provision of parental coping strategies, (3) assistance in maintaining routine, and (4) preventing functional deterioration. Principal Components Analysis was used for the CETS questionnaire and the relationships of CETS and TPI-C with child’s age and the type of session were evaluated using Spearman’s correlations and the Kruskal–Wallis H test. In total, sixty-seven telerehabilitation sessions, with clients aged 11.31 ± 4.8 years, were documented by clinicians. Three components (child, session, parent) explained 71.3% of the variance in CETS. According to therapists, their ability to maintain the therapeutic alliance was generally higher than their ability to achieve other predefined goals (p &lt; 0.01). With younger children, the ability to provide feedback to the child, grade treatment difficulty and provide coping strategies to the parents were diminished. Families perceived the therapist as being highly present in therapy regardless of treatment type. These results demonstrate a potential framework for the dissemination of telerehabilitation services in pediatric rehabilitation