Search

Background: Parents play a central role in the treatment of childhood stuttering. Addressing parental attitudes toward stuttering is helpful therapeutically. The extent to which differences in attitudes toward stuttering exist on the basis of sex, geographical region and parental status (e.g., parent of a stuttering child, parent of a nonstuttering child, nonparent) is unclear. Many studies investigating such factors have used the Public Opinion Survey of Human Attributes–Stuttering (POSHA–S) questionnaire. A large POSHA–S database has collected responses from over 20 000 people from 49 countries. Aims: The aim of this study was to use the POSHA‐S database to examine the extent to which the following variables influence attitudes toward stuttering: (a) parents' sex (mothers vs. fathers), (b) geographic region (Middle East vs. Europe and North America), (c) parents' children (stuttering vs. nonstuttering) and (d) parental status (parents versus nonparents). Methods & Procedures: Data used in this study were extracted from selected, relevant studies that administered the POSHA–S to respondents. The Overall Stuttering Scores were compared on the basis of sex and parent status (i.e., mothers and fathers; nonparent women and men) and were then compared within and across the two geographical areas. Group comparisons were performed using analysis of variance followed by independent t tests, and Cohen's d was calculated to determine effect sizes. Outcomes & Results: Statistically significant differences were observed upon the basis of geographical region. In general, male parents and nonparents tend to have more positive stuttering attitudes among the Middle Eastern samples while female parents and nonparents tend to show more positive attitudes in European and North American samples in the POSHA–S database. Effect sizes were small for all comparisons. Conclusions & Implications: The effect of geographic region and culture may predict sex‐based differences among mothers' and fathers' attitudes toward stuttering; however, the clinical significance is unclear. Additional research is needed to better understand how children who stutter are affected by their parents' attitudes toward stuttering. What this paper adds: What is already known on this subject: The research clearly indicates that attitudes toward stuttering vary according to geographical region. Less clear is whether mothers and fathers from geographically diverse backgrounds hold different attitudes toward stuttering and the extent to which parental status (being a parent, parent of a child who stutters or nonparent) affects attitudes toward stuttering. What this study adds: This study's findings confirm that geographical differences do influence attitudes toward stuttering. Male parents and nonparents tend to have equal or more positive attitudes toward stuttering in Middle Eastern samples, whereas non‐Middle Eastern female parents and nonparents tend to show hold more positive attitudes. What are the clinical implications of this work?: In addition to being culturally sensitive when working with parents of children who stutter, clinicians should also consider that mothers and fathers may have some differences in attitudes and behaviours toward their child's stuttering. These differences should be considered when designing treatment plans. It should also be noted that, despite statistical significance, the effect sizes in this study were low, suggesting that further research as well as close collaboration with parents of children who stutter is warranted. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and aims Prohibitions on producing, distributing and selling cannabis are loosening in various jurisdictions around the world. This paper describes the diversification of cannabis supply laws and discusses the challenges to and opportunities for learning from these changes. Methods We document changes in cannabis supply laws that de jure legalized cannabis production for medical and/or non-medical purposes (excluding industrial hemp) in Australasia, Europe, North America and South America. We also highlight challenges to evaluating these legal changes based on our experiences studying cannabis laws and policies in the United States. Findings As of August 2016, two countries have passed laws to legalize large-scale cannabis production for non-medical purposes at the national (Uruguay) or subnational level (four US states). At least nine other countries legally allow (or will soon allow) cannabis to be supplied for medicinal purposes. Most of the changes in cannabis supply laws have occurred since 2010. The data available in most countries are inadequate for rigorously evaluating the changes in cannabis supply laws. Conclusion The evidence base for assessing changes in cannabis supply laws remains weak. Efforts should focus upon collecting information about quantities consumed and market transactions as well as validating self-report surveys. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]