Emotional self-efficacy, conduct problems, and academic attainment: Developmental cascade effects in early adolescence

The study is amongst the first of its kind to utilise developmental cascade modelling in order to examine the inter-relations between emotional self-efficacy, conduct problems, and attainment in a large, nationally representative sample of English adolescents (n = 2,414, aged 11 years). Using a 3-wave, longitudinal, cross lagged-design, we tested three cascading hypotheses: adjustment erosion, adjustment fortification, and academic incompetence. A fourth hypothesis considered the role of shared risk. Results supported small effects consistent with the cascade hypotheses, and a small but significant effect was found for shared risk. Strengths and limits of the study are considered alongside a discussion of the implications for these findings

Tell Me about Loneliness: Interviews with Young People about What Loneliness Is and How to Cope with It

Background: loneliness is a common experience for adolescents, yet the voices of adolescents are missing from current conceptualisations of loneliness. That means, measures that have been created based on current conceptualisations may miss important contexts of adolescence, such as the roles of friendships, that determine the way loneliness is experienced. The current study aims to centre adolescent voices to identify how they conceptualise loneliness and what strategies they consider to be useful for adolescents to cope with loneliness. Method: thematic framework analysis (TFA) was conducted on qualitative interviews with young people aged 8–14 years in Belgium and Italy to identify salient themes in their conceptualisations of loneliness. Results: Loneliness was conceptualised as a negative emotional state involving negative thinking patterns that occurs when an individual perceives they are missing out on a desired aspect in their social relationships. Coping strategies related to alleviating negative affect, and aiding social reconnection. Conclusions: friendships with peers were understood to be central to adolescent loneliness experiences. In line with that, loneliness was seen to be experienced at school. Age-related differences in friendship expectations were identified, highlighting how developmental needs relate to the loneliness experience

Tell Me about Loneliness: Interviews with Young People about What Loneliness Is and How to Cope with It

From MDPI via Jisc Publications RouterHistory: accepted 2021-11-09, pub-electronic 2021-11-12Publication status: PublishedFunder: University of Manchester; Grant(s): 188130Background: loneliness is a common experience for adolescents, yet the voices of adolescents are missing from current conceptualisations of loneliness. That means, measures that have been created based on current conceptualisations may miss important contexts of adolescence, such as the roles of friendships, that determine the way loneliness is experienced. The current study aims to centre adolescent voices to identify how they conceptualise loneliness and what strategies they consider to be useful for adolescents to cope with loneliness. Method: thematic framework analysis (TFA) was conducted on qualitative interviews with young people aged 8–14 years in Belgium and Italy to identify salient themes in their conceptualisations of loneliness. Results: Loneliness was conceptualised as a negative emotional state involving negative thinking patterns that occurs when an individual perceives they are missing out on a desired aspect in their social relationships. Coping strategies related to alleviating negative affect, and aiding social reconnection. Conclusions: friendships with peers were understood to be central to adolescent loneliness experiences. In line with that, loneliness was seen to be experienced at school. Age-related differences in friendship expectations were identified, highlighting how developmental needs relate to the loneliness experience

The Good Behaviour Game intervention to improve behavioural and other outcomes for children aged 7-8 years: A cluster RCT

Background. Universal, school-based behaviour management interventions can produce meaningful improvements in children’s behaviour and other outcomes. However, the UK evidence base for these remains limited. Objective. The objective of this trial was to investigate the impact, value for money and longer-term outcomes of the Good Behaviour Game. Study hypotheses centred on immediate impact (hypothesis 1); subgroup effects (at-risk boys, hypothesis 2); implementation effects (dosage, hypothesis 3); maintenance/sleeper effects (12- and 24-month post-intervention follow-ups, hypothesis 4); the temporal association between mental health and academic attainment (hypothesis 5); and the health economic impact of the Good Behaviour Game (hypothesis 6). Design. This was a two-group, parallel, cluster-randomised controlled trial. Primary schools (n = 77) were randomly assigned to implement the Good Behaviour Game for 2 years or continue their usual practice, after which there was a 2-year follow-up period. Setting. The trial was set in primary schools across 23 local authorities in England. Participants. Participants were children (n = 3084) aged 7–8 years attending participating schools. Intervention. The Good Behaviour Game is a universal behaviour management intervention. Its core components are classroom rules, team membership, monitoring behaviour and positive reinforcement. It is played alongside a normal classroom activity for a set time, during which children work in teams to win the game to access the agreed rewards. The Good Behaviour Game is a manualised intervention delivered by teachers who receive initial training and ongoing coaching. Main outcome measures. The measures were conduct problems (primary outcome; teacher-rated Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire scores); emotional symptoms (teacher-rated Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire scores); psychological well-being, peer and social support, bullying (i.e. social acceptance) and school environment (self-report Kidscreen survey results); and school absence and exclusion from school (measured using National Pupil Database records). Measures of academic attainment (reading, standardised tests), disruptive behaviour, concentration problems and prosocial behaviour (Teacher Observation of Child Adaptation Checklist scores) were also collected during the 2-year follow-up period. Results. There was no evidence that the Good Behaviour Game improved any outcomes (hypothesis 1). The only significant subgroup moderator effect identified was contrary to expectations: at-risk boys in Good Behaviour Game schools reported higher rates of bullying (hypothesis 2). The moderating effect of the amount of time spent playing the Good Behaviour Game was unclear; in the context of both moderate (≥ 1030 minutes over 2 years) and high (≥ 1348 minutes over 2 years) intervention compliance, there were significant reductions in children’s psychological well-being, but also significant reductions in their school absence (hypothesis 3). The only medium-term intervention effect was for peer and social support at 24 months, but this was in a negative direction (hypothesis 4). After disaggregating within- and between-individual effects, we found no temporal within-individual associations between children’s mental health and their academic attainment (hypothesis 5). Last, our cost–consequences analysis indicated that the Good Behaviour Game does not provide value for money (hypothesis 6). Limitations. Limitations included the post-test-only design for several secondary outcomes; suboptimal implementation dosage (mitigated by complier-average causal effect estimation); and moderate child-level attrition (18.5% for the primary outcome analysis), particularly in the post-trial follow-up period (mitigated by the use of full information maximum likelihood procedures). Future work. Questions remain regarding programme differentiation (e.g. how distinct is the Good Behaviour Game from existing behaviour management practices, and does this makes a difference in terms of its impact?) and if the Good Behaviour Game is impactful when combined with a complementary preventative intervention (as has been the case in several earlier trials). Conclusion. The Good Behaviour Game cannot be recommended based on the findings reported here

Tumor Endothelium Marker-8 Based Decoys Exhibit Superiority over Capillary Morphogenesis Protein-2 Based Decoys as Anthrax Toxin Inhibitors

Anthrax toxin is the major virulence factor produced by Bacillus anthracis. The toxin consists of three protein subunits: protective antigen (PA), lethal factor, and edema factor. Inhibition of PA binding to its receptors, tumor endothelium marker-8 (TEM8) and capillary morphogenesis protein-2 (CMG2) can effectively block anthrax intoxication, which is particularly valuable when the toxin has already been overproduced at the late stage of anthrax infection, thus rendering antibiotics ineffectual. Receptor-like agonists, such as the mammalian cell-expressed von Willebrand factor type A (vWA) domain of CMG2 (sCMG2), have demonstrated potency against the anthrax toxin. However, the soluble vWA domain of TEM8 (sTEM8) was ruled out as an anthrax toxin inhibitor candidate due to its inferior affinity to PA. In the present study, we report that L56A, a PA-binding-affinity-elevated mutant of sTEM8, could inhibit anthrax intoxication as effectively as sCMG2 in Fisher 344 rats. Additionally, pharmacokinetics showed that L56A and sTEM8 exhibit advantages over sCMG2 with better lung-targeting and longer plasma retention time, which may contribute to their enhanced protective ability in vivo. Our results suggest that receptor decoys based on TEM8 are promising anthrax toxin inhibitors and, together with the pharmacokinetic studies in this report, may contribute to the development of novel anthrax drugs