The Birth of Children's Book Reviews, 1918-1929

This study examines the beginnings of regularly published reviews of children's books in columns and journals from the period of 1918 to 1929. The influence of the historical context on this development is considered. The first year or volume of children's book reviews in The Bookman (1918), New York Herald-Tribune Books (1924), The Horn Book (1924), Saturday Review of Literature (1927), and Library Journal (1929) are analyzed with regards to audience addressed, the reviewer's intention, format used, and inclusion of bibliographic and other commentary or material. In addition, individual reviews of the 1922 to 1930 Newbery Award winners are analyzed as to the descriptive, critical, and sociological elements they contained, length, and reviewer's attitude towards the book. Booklist is briefly considered in addition to the previous journals in this section. The early reviews are characterized by an interest in promotion of reading and owning quality children's books to a general audience of parents. These characteristics still influence the reviews being published today for library professionals

Wellness and Coping of Physicians Who Worked in ICUs During the Pandemic: A Multicenter Cross-Sectional North American Survey*

ObjectivesFew surveys have focused on physician moral distress, burnout, and professional fulfilment. We assessed physician wellness and coping during the COVID-19 pandemic.DesignCross-sectional survey using four validated instruments.SettingSixty-two sites in Canada and the United States.SubjectsAttending physicians (adult, pediatric; intensivist, nonintensivist) who worked in North American ICUs.InterventionNone.Measurements and main resultsWe analysed 431 questionnaires (43.3% response rate) from 25 states and eight provinces. Respondents were predominantly male (229 [55.6%]) and in practice for 11.8 ± 9.8 years. Compared with prepandemic, respondents reported significant intrapandemic increases in days worked/mo, ICU bed occupancy, and self-reported moral distress (240 [56.9%]) and burnout (259 [63.8%]). Of the 10 top-ranked items that incited moral distress, most pertained to regulatory/organizational ( n = 6) or local/institutional ( n = 2) issues or both ( n = 2). Average moral distress (95.6 ± 66.9), professional fulfilment (6.5 ± 2.1), and burnout scores (3.6 ± 2.0) were moderate with 227 physicians (54.6%) meeting burnout criteria. A significant dose-response existed between COVID-19 patient volume and moral distress scores. Physicians who worked more days/mo and more scheduled in-house nightshifts, especially combined with more unscheduled in-house nightshifts, experienced significantly more moral distress. One in five physicians used at least one maladaptive coping strategy. We identified four coping profiles (active/social, avoidant, mixed/ambivalent, infrequent) that were associated with significant differences across all wellness measures.ConclusionsDespite moderate intrapandemic moral distress and burnout, physicians experienced moderate professional fulfilment. However, one in five physicians used at least one maladaptive coping strategy. We highlight potentially modifiable factors at individual, institutional, and regulatory levels to enhance physician wellness