The psychological well-being of Norwegian adolescents exposed in utero to radiation from the Chernobyl accident

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>On 26 April 1986, the Chernobyl nuclear power plant suffered an accident. Several areas of central Norway were heavily affected by far field radioactive fallout. The present study focuses on the psychological well-being of adolescents who were exposed to this radiation as fetuses.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>The adolescents (n = 53) and their mothers reported their perceptions of the adolescents' current psychological health as measured by the Youth Self Report and Child Behaviour Checklist.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>In spite of previous reports of subtle cognitive deficits in these exposed adolescents, there were few self-reported problems and fewer problems reported by the mothers. This contrasts with findings of studies of children from the former Soviet Union exposed in utero, in which objective measures are inconsistent, and self-reports, especially by mothers, express concern for adolescents' cognitive functioning and psychological well-being.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>In the current paper, we explore possible explanations for this discrepancy and suggest that protective factors in Norway, in addition to perceived physical and psychological distance from the disaster, made the mothers less vulnerable to Chernobyl-related anxiety, thus preventing a negative effect on the psychological health of both mother and child.</p

Clinician-rated mental health in outpatient child and adolescent mental health services: associations with parent, teacher and adolescent ratings

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Clinician-rated measures are used extensively in child and adolescent mental health services (CAMHS). The Health of the Nation Outcome Scales for Children and Adolescents (HoNOSCA) is a short clinician-rated measure developed for ordinary clinical practice, with increasing use internationally. Several studies have investigated its psychometric properties, but there are few data on its correspondence with other methods, rated by other informants. We compared the HoNOSCA with the well-established Achenbach System of Empirically Based Assessment (ASEBA) questionnaires: the Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL), the Teacher's Report Form (TRF), and the Youth Self-Report (YSR).</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Data on 153 patients aged 6-17 years at seven outpatient CAMHS clinics in Norway were analysed. Clinicians completed the HoNOSCA, whereas parents, teachers, and adolescents filled in the ASEBA forms. HoNOSCA <it>total score </it>and nine of its scales were compared with similar ASEBA scales. With a multiple regression model, we investigated how the ASEBA ratings predicted the clinician-rated HoNOSCA and whether the different informants' scores made any unique contribution to the prediction of the HoNOSCA scales.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>We found moderate correlations between the total problems rated by the clinicians (HoNOSCA) and by the other informants (ASEBA) and good correspondence between eight of the nine HoNOSCA scales and the similar ASEBA scales. The exception was HoNOSCA scale 8 <it>psychosomatic symptoms </it>compared with the ASEBA s<it>omatic problems </it>scale. In the regression analyses, the CBCL and TRF <it>total problems </it>scores together explained 27% of the variance in the HoNOSCA <it>total scores </it>(23% for the age group 11-17 years, also including the YSR). The CBCL provided unique information for the prediction of the HoNOSCA <it>total score</it>, HoNOSCA scale 1 <it>aggressive behaviour</it>, HoNOSCA scale 2 <it>overactivity or attention problems</it>, HoNOSCA scale 9 <it>emotional symptoms</it>, and HoNOSCA scale 10 <it>peer problems; </it>the TRF for all these except HoNOSCA scale 9 <it>emotional symptoms; </it>and the YSR for HoNOSCA scale 9 <it>emotional symptoms </it>only.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>This study supports the concurrent validity of the HoNOSCA. It also demonstrates that parents, teachers and adolescents all contribute unique information in relation to the clinician-rated HoNOSCA, indicating that the HoNOSCA ratings reflect unique perspectives from multiple informants.</p

A comprehensive scoping review of ability and disability in ADHD using the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health-Children and Youth Version (ICF-CY)

This is the first in a series of four empirical investigations to develop International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) Core Sets for Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD). The objective here was to use a comprehensive scoping review approach to identify the concepts of functional ability and disability used in the scientific ADHD literature and link these to the nomenclature of the ICF-CY. Systematic searches were conducted using Medline/PubMed, PsycINFO, ERIC and Cinahl, to extract the relevant concepts of functional ability and disability from the identified outcome studies of ADHD. These concepts were then linked to ICF-CY by two independent researchers using a standardized linking procedure. Data from identified studies were analysed until saturation of ICF-CY categories was reached. Eighty studies were included in the final analysis. Concepts contained in these studies were linked to 128 ICF-CY categories. Of these categories, 68 were considered to be particularly relevant to ADHD (i.e., identified in at least 5 % of the studies). Of these, 32 were related to Activities and participation, 31 were related to Body functions, and five were related to environmental factors. The five most frequently identified categories were school education (53 %), energy and drive functions (50 %), psychomotor functions (50 %), attention functions (49 %), and emotional functions (45 %). The broad variety of ICF-CY categories identified in this study underlines the necessity to consider ability and disability in ADHD across all dimensions of life, for which the ICF-CY provides a valuable and universally applicable framework. These results, in combination with three additional preparatory studies (expert survey, focus groups, clinical study), will provide a scientific basis to define the ICF Core Sets for ADHD for multi-purpose use in basic and applied research, and every day clinical practice