Longitudinal Impact of Childhood Adversity on Early Adolescent Mental Health During the COVID-19 Pandemic in the ABCD Study Cohort: Does Race or Ethnicity Moderate Findings?

Background During the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States, mental health among youth has been negatively affected. Youth with a history of adverse childhood experiences (ACEs), as well as youth from minoritized racial-ethnic backgrounds, may be especially vulnerable to experiencing COVID-19–related distress. The aims of this study are to examine whether exposure to pre-pandemic ACEs predicts mental health during the COVID-19 pandemic in youth and whether racial-ethnic background moderates these effects. Methods From May to August 2020, 7983 youths (mean age, 12.5 years; range, 10.6–14.6 years) in the Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development (ABCD) Study completed at least one of three online surveys measuring the impact of the pandemic on their mental health. Data were evaluated in relation to youths\u27 pre-pandemic mental health and ACEs. Results Pre-pandemic ACE history significantly predicted poorer mental health across all outcomes and greater COVID-19–related stress and impact of fears on well-being. Youths reported improved mental health during the pandemic (from May to August 2020). While reporting similar levels of mental health, youths from minoritized racial-ethnic backgrounds had elevated COVID-19–related worry, stress, and impact on well-being. Race and ethnicity generally did not moderate ACE effects. Older youths, girls, and those with greater pre-pandemic internalizing symptoms also reported greater mental health symptoms. Conclusions Youths who experienced greater childhood adversity reported greater negative affect and COVID-19–related distress during the pandemic. Although they reported generally better mood, Asian American, Black, and multiracial youths reported greater COVID-19–related distress and experienced COVID-19–related discrimination compared with non-Hispanic White youths, highlighting potential health disparities

The impact of language on concrete magnitude judgments from unbalanced bilingual 7-to-11graders to balanced bilingual adults in German and French

info:eu-repo/semantics/nonPublishe

How does language affect numerical processing? The role of the teaching language on two-digit magnitude judgments in German-French bilingual 7- to-11 graders

info:eu-repo/semantics/publishe

The effect of number syntax on two-digit magnitude judgments in German-French bilinguals.

The study examined the effect of language and presentation mode on numerical processing skills in German-French bilinguals. This bilingual combination is particularly interesting because the order of two digit number words is inversed in both languages: decade-unit in French but unit-decade in German. Further, previous studies used written number word presentations as verbal notation to activate language, which are, however, rarely used in everyday life. The present study therefore tackled the question whether two-digit magnitude judgments are affected by the presentation mode (visual Arabic vs. auditory words) and the language (German vs. French)? Data stem from adult participants (mean age: 25,3 years) who were proficient German-French bilinguals. The within-subject design involved two-digit number pair comparisons presented visually and auditory in German and in French. In line with previous studies, participants responded faster and more accurately on compatible than on incompatible trials in the visual Arabic presentation mode in both languages (compatibility effect): In compatible number pairs, the decades and units concord to the same magnitude decision (e.g. 23_57; decade: 22) for incompatible number pairs. In the auditory mode, the results showed a tendency for a regular compatibility effect in German and an inverse compatibility effect in French with participants responding faster on incompatible trials suggesting that bilinguals process numerical tasks in the language of presentation similar to monolinguals using the same language. Conclusively, the results imply differential numerical processing according to the presentation mode (visual Arabic vs. auditory words) and the language (German vs. French)

Pandemic-Related Changes in the Prevalence of Early Adolescent Alcohol and Drug Use, 2020-2021: Data From a Multisite Cohort Study.

PurposeEvaluate changes in early adolescent substance use from May 2020 to May 2021 during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic using data from a prospective nationwide cohort: the Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development Study.MethodsIn 2018-2019, 9,270 youth aged 11.5-13.0 completed a prepandemic assessment of past-month alcohol and drug use, then up to seven during-pandemic assessments between May 2020 and May 2021. We compared the prevalence of substance use among same-age youth across these eight timepoints.ResultsPandemic-related decreases in the past-month prevalence of alcohol use were detectable in May 2020, grew larger over time, and remained substantial in May 2021 (0.3% vs. 3.2% prepandemic, p <.001). Pandemic-related increases in inhalant use (p = .04) and prescription drug misuse (p < .001) were detectable in May 2020, shrunk over time, and were smaller but still detectable in May 2021(0.1%-0.2% vs. 0% pre-pandemic). Pandemic-related increases in nicotine use were detectable between May 2020 and March 2021 and no longer significantly different from prepandemic levels in May 2021 (0.5% vs. 0.2% prepandemic, p = .09). There was significant heterogeneity in pandemic-related change in substance use at some timepoints, with increased rates among youth identified as Black or Hispanic or in lower-income families versus stable or decreased rates among youth identified as White or in higher-income families.DiscussionAmong youth ages 11.5-13.0 years old, rates of alcohol use remained dramatically reduced in May 2021 relative to prepandemic and rates of prescription drug misuse and inhalant use remained modestly increased. Differences remained despite the partial restoration of prepandemic life, raising questions about whether youth who spent early adolescence under pandemic conditions may exhibit persistently different patterns of substance use

Parental knowledge/monitoring and adolescent substance use: A causal relationship?

Many studies have shown that parental knowledge/monitoring is correlated with adolescent substance use, but the association may be confounded by the many preexisting differences between families with low versus high monitoring. We attempted to produce more rigorous evidence for a causal relation using a longitudinal design that took advantage of within-family fluctuations in knowledge/monitoring during the COVID-19 pandemic.info:eu-repo/semantics/publishe

Parental Knowledge/Monitoring and Depressive Symptoms During Adolescence: Protective Factor or Spurious Association?

Parental knowledge/monitoring is negatively associated with adolescents' depressive symptoms, suggesting monitoring could be a target for prevention and treatment. However, no study has rigorously addressed the possibility that this association is spurious, leaving the clinical and etiological implications unclear. The goal of this study was to conduct a more rigorous test of whether knowledge/monitoring is causally related to depressive symptoms. 7940 youth (ages 10.5-15.6 years, 49% female) at 21 sites across the U.S. completed measures of parental knowledge/monitoring and their own depressive symptoms at four waves 11-22 weeks apart during the COVID-19 pandemic. First, monitoring and depression were examined in standard, between-family regression models. Second, within-family changes in monitoring and depression between assessments were examined in first differenced regressions. Because the latter models control for stable, between-family differences, they comprise a stronger test of a causal relation. In standard, between-family models, parental monitoring and youths' depressive symptoms were negatively associated (standardized [Formula: see text]= -0.22, 95% CI = [-0.25, -0.20], p < 0.001). In first-differenced, within-family models, the association shrunk by about 55% (standardized [Formula: see text]= -0.10, 95% CI = [-0.12, -0.08], p < 0.001). The magnitude of within-family association remained similar when adjusting for potential time-varying confounders and did not vary significantly by youth sex, age, or history of depressive disorder. Thus, in this community-based sample, much of the prima facie association between parental knowledge/monitoring and youths' depressive symptoms was driven by confounding variables rather than a causal process. Given the evidence to date, a clinical focus on increasing parental knowledge/monitoring should not be expected to produce meaningfully large improvements in youths' depression

Negative Impacts of Pandemic Induced At-Home Remote Learning Can Be Mitigated by Parental Involvement

Format changes in U.S. schooling in response to the COVID-19 pandemic varied by month and by school district, ranging from exclusively home-based to full in-person learning. The impact of these changes on adolescent schooling experiences, and the factors that mitigate such impact, have been challenging to quantify. To address these challenges we employed bi-monthly repeated surveys of youths (N = 6, 546, aged 13–14 years) in a longitudinal study, starting before the pandemic peak (October 2020) and continuing through one year after the pandemic was declared (March 2021). We investigated how school format (in-person vs. remote) impacted objective time spent on academic activities and the subjective experience of school, and how these were influenced by parental engagement. Periods of exclusive at-home remote schooling were pervasive—reported by more than 60% of youths—and linked to a reduction in school enjoyment and time spent on reading, math, and science. In contrast, such periods were linked to more time with parents or guardians helping with school activities, and the frequency of such parental involvement was associated with reductions in negative feelings about school. Results point to potential pathways to mitigate the negative consequences of future school disruptions

Resilience to COVID-19: Socioeconomic Disadvantage Associated With Positive Caregiver–Youth Communication and Youth Preventative Actions

Socioeconomic disadvantage is associated with larger COVID-19 disease burdens and pandemic-related economic impacts. We utilized the longitudinal Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development Study to understand how family- and neighborhood-level socioeconomic disadvantage relate to disease burden, family communication, and preventative responses to the pandemic in over 6,000 youth-caregiver dyads. Data were collected at three timepoints (May–August 2020). Here, we show that both family- and neighborhood-level disadvantage were associated with caregivers\u27 reports of greater family COVID-19 disease burden, less perceived exposure risk, more frequent caregiver-youth conversations about COVID-19 risk/prevention and reassurance, and greater youth preventative behaviors. Families with more socioeconomic disadvantage may be adaptively incorporating more protective strategies to reduce emotional distress and likelihood of COVID-19 infection. The results highlight the importance of caregiver-youth communication and disease-preventative practices for buffering the economic and disease burdens of COVID-19, along with policies and programs that reduce these burdens for families with socioeconomic disadvantage

Resilience to COVID-19: Socioeconomic Disadvantage Associated With Positive Caregiver-Youth Communication and Youth Preventative Actions.

Socioeconomic disadvantage is associated with larger COVID-19 disease burdens and pandemic-related economic impacts. We utilized the longitudinal Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development Study to understand how family- and neighborhood-level socioeconomic disadvantage relate to disease burden, family communication, and preventative responses to the pandemic in over 6,000 youth-caregiver dyads. Data were collected at three timepoints (May-August 2020). Here, we show that both family- and neighborhood-level disadvantage were associated with caregivers' reports of greater family COVID-19 disease burden, less perceived exposure risk, more frequent caregiver-youth conversations about COVID-19 risk/prevention and reassurance, and greater youth preventative behaviors. Families with more socioeconomic disadvantage may be adaptively incorporating more protective strategies to reduce emotional distress and likelihood of COVID-19 infection. The results highlight the importance of caregiver-youth communication and disease-preventative practices for buffering the economic and disease burdens of COVID-19, along with policies and programs that reduce these burdens for families with socioeconomic disadvantage