Strengths Model for Youth: Moving toward a Client-Centered, Strengths-based Model of Case Management in Community Mental Health

Approximately 13 to 20% of U.S. children and adolescents experience a mental disorder in a given year (Perou et al., 2013), with only half of these youth receiving mental health care (Kataoka, Zhang, & Wells, 2002; Merikangas, Nakamura, & Kessler, 2009). Even when children do access mental health services, approximate- ly 40% to 60% discontinue before completing their treatment (Baruch, Vrouva, & Fearon, 2009; Hoste, Zaitsoff, Hewell & le Grange, 2007; Miller, Southam-Gerow & Allin, 2008; Oruche, Downs, Holloway, Draucker & Aalsma, 2014). These statistics highlight the critical need for identification and implementation of effective child and family interventions for the mental health service system. Case management is a widely offered service within the children’s mental health system, but there is a scarcity of literature and research on models of case management and their effec- tiveness. This chapter introduces one model of case management, Strengths Model for Youth, and summarizes the current evidence on its effectiveness

Religiosity, Knowledge of Evolution, and Political Ideology as Predictors of Attitudes Towards the Evolution v. Creationism Controversy

Since Darwin On the Origin of Species over 150 years ago, evolution via natural selection has gained essentially unilateral support among scientists, with 97% of scientists agree that life evolved over time, while a mere 12% to 29% of the general public accepts evolution via natural selection. About three-quarters of the public support teaching creationism in public school science classes--a violation of the First Amendment--and a recent survey shows that just 28% of high school biology teachers advocating for evolution in their classroom, as per the national guidelines. The present study aims to investigate and clarify certain relationships that lead people to accept or reject evolution, to support the teaching of creationism in science class, and relevant moderators. Part one of the present study aims to clarify the relationship between knowledge of evolution and acceptance of evolution, findings about which have been mixed in previous research. Religiosity as a predictor of acceptance of evolution will be included for replication of previous research. Part two of the present study will examine how acceptance of evolution plays into support for teaching evolution or creationism, and will also examine two potential moderators of this relationship. First, one\u27s confidence in their beliefs about the history of life, and second, one\u27s tolerance for scientific ideas with which they disagree, are expected to moderate their support for teaching evolution or creationism. Part three of the present study aims to examine the effect of arguing in favor of teaching evolution, as per the national guidelines, on people\u27s support for teaching evolution

Emerging landscape of oncogenic signatures across human cancers.

Cancer therapy is challenged by the diversity of molecular implementations of oncogenic processes and by the resulting variation in therapeutic responses. Projects such as The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) provide molecular tumor maps in unprecedented detail. The interpretation of these maps remains a major challenge. Here we distilled thousands of genetic and epigenetic features altered in cancers to ∼500 selected functional events (SFEs). Using this simplified description, we derived a hierarchical classification of 3,299 TCGA tumors from 12 cancer types. The top classes are dominated by either mutations (M class) or copy number changes (C class). This distinction is clearest at the extremes of genomic instability, indicating the presence of different oncogenic processes. The full hierarchy shows functional event patterns characteristic of multiple cross-tissue groups of tumors, termed oncogenic signature classes. Targetable functional events in a tumor class are suggestive of class-specific combination therapy. These results may assist in the definition of clinical trials to match actionable oncogenic signatures with personalized therapies

Developing a community-led rare disease ELSI research agenda

Abstract Background Research priorities are best defined through engagement with communities who will be impacted by the research and have lived experience of the topics to be studied. We aimed to establish a pediatric rare disease community stakeholder group and empower them in (1) eliciting perspectives from affected families in the wider region and (2) synthesizing collective ideas into a research agenda focused on shared ethical, legal, and social implications (ELSI) across rare disease. Methods This two-year project utilized a community-centered approach to engage rare disease community members as equal partners in developing a research agenda for ELSI in rare disease. We established “Rare Voices” (RV), a 22-member stakeholder group of patients, parents, clinicians and researchers. Following capacity-building trainings, RV designed and conducted listening sessions with teen patients and parents of children with rare diseases to explore challenges, positive experiences, and ethical concerns. Listening session findings were synthesized and contextualized into research topics, which RV members further refined and prioritized. We used established measures to assess RV member engagement and satisfaction. Results From 14 listening sessions with parents (n = 52) and teen patients (n = 13), RV identified eight core research topics as most important for future rare disease research: coordinating care, communication, accessing resources and care, impact on family unit, community and support in society, mental health and identity, ethical aspects of care, and uncertainty. RV members were highly engaged throughout the two-year project and reported high levels of satisfaction with the experience and research agenda. Conclusions Through capacity-building and authentic engagement, this project resulted in a community-led rare disease research agenda to guide future rare disease ELSI research that aligns with patients’ and families’ priorities. An environment of equal partnership and respect created a space for mutual learning where community members were empowered to shape the research agenda based on their collective experiences. The agenda recognizes the shared psychosocial and healthcare experiences of rare disease and offers practical areas of research to address patient and family needs

Initial presenting manifestations in 16,486 patients with inborn errors of immunity include infections and noninfectious manifestations

Background: Inborn errors of immunity (IEI) are rare diseases, which makes diagnosis a challenge. A better description of the initial presenting manifestations should improve awareness and avoid diagnostic delay. Although increased infection susceptibility is a well-known initial IEI manifestation, less is known about the frequency of other presenting manifestations. Objective: We sought to analyze age-related initial presenting manifestations of IEI including different IEI disease cohorts. Methods: We analyzed data on 16,486 patients of the European Society for Immunodeficiencies Registry. Patients with autoinflammatory diseases were excluded because of the limited number registered. Results: Overall, 68% of patients initially presented with infections only, 9% with immune dysregulation only, and 9% with a combination of both. Syndromic features were the presenting feature in 12%, 4% had laboratory abnormalities only, 1.5% were diagnosed because of family history only, and 0.8% presented with malignancy. Two-third of patients with IEI presented before the age of 6 years, but a quarter of patients developed initial symptoms only as adults. Immune dysregulation was most frequently recognized as an initial IEI manifestation between age 6 and 25 years, with male predominance until age 10 years, shifting to female predominance after age 40 years. Infections were most prevalent as a first manifestation in patients presenting after age 30 years. Conclusions: An exclusive focus on infection-centered warning signs would have missed around 25% of patients with IEI who initially present with other manifestations. (J Allergy Clin Immunol 2021;148:1332-41.