Search

Mental health is a significant concern among young people, particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic. Notably, mental health problems can significantly reduce student performance in school, including both engagement and achievement. Both mental health problems and reduced student performance often arise due to "peer victimization," which can include teasing, racial- or gender-based discrimination, and/or physical assault. Stress has been proposed as one mechanism through which victimization influences mental health, and stress can also interfere with academic performance at school, including engagement and achievement. To date, however, no research has evaluated longitudinal associations between victimization and stress, and how these longitudinal patterns may impact adolescent behavior and mental health. In this study, we used data from a 2-year cluster randomized trial of cooperative learning to evaluate an etiological process model that includes (1) longitudinal reciprocal effects between victimization and stress, and (2) the effects of both victimization and stress on student mental health and academic engagement. We hypothesized that victimization and stress would have significant reciprocal effects, and that both would predict greater mental health problems and lower academic engagement. We further hypothesized that cooperative learning would have significant effects on all constructs. We found partial support for this model, whereby stress predicted greater victimization, but victimization did not predict increased stress. While both factors were linked to student outcomes, stress was a more powerful predictor. We also found significant salutary effects of cooperative learning on all constructs. The implications of these results for student behavioral and mental health are discussed.

The aim of this study was to develop and evaluate a proof-of-concept open-source individualized Patient Decision Aid (iPDA) with a group of patients, physicians, and computer scientists. The iPDA was developed based on the International Patient Decision Aid Standards (IPDAS). A previously published questionnaire was adapted and used to test the user-friendliness and content of the iPDA. The questionnaire contained 40 multiple-choice questions, and answers were given on a 5-point Likert Scale (1–5) ranging from “strongly disagree” to “strongly agree.” In addition to the questionnaire, semi-structured interviews were conducted with patients. We performed a descriptive analysis of the responses. The iPDA was evaluated by 28 computer scientists, 21 physicians, and 13 patients. The results demonstrate that the iPDA was found valuable by 92% (patients), 96% (computer scientists), and 86% (physicians), while the treatment information was judged useful by 92%, 96%, and 95%, respectively. Additionally, the tool was thought to be motivating for patients to actively engage in their treatment by 92%, 93%, and 91% of the above respondents groups. More multimedia components and less text were suggested by the respondents as ways to improve the tool and user interface. In conclusion, we successfully developed and tested an iPDA for patients with stage I–II Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC).

The aim of this study was to develop and evaluate a proof-of-concept opensource individualized Patient Decision Aid (iPDA) with a group of patients, physicians, and computer scientists. The iPDA was developed based on the International Patient Decision Aid Standards (IPDAS). A previously published questionnaire was adapted and used to test the user-friendliness and content of the iPDA. The questionnaire contained 40 multiple-choice questions, and answers were given on a 5-point Likert Scale (1-5) ranging from "strongly disagree" to "strongly agree." In addition to the questionnaire, semi-structured interviews were conducted with patients. We performed a descriptive analysis of the responses. The iPDA was evaluated by 28 computer scientists, 21 physicians, and 13 patients. The results demonstrate that the iPDA was found valuable by 92% (patients), 96% (computer scientists), and 86% (physicians), while the treatment information was judged useful by 92%, 96%, and 95%, respectively. Additionally, the tool was thought to be motivating for patients to actively engage in their treatment by 92%, 93%, and 91% of the above respondents groups. More multimedia components and less text were suggested by the respondents as ways to improve the tool and user interface. In conclusion, we successfully developed and tested an iPDA for patients with stage I-II Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

AbstractStudents with disabilities are at an increased risk of experiencing poorer quality peer relationships than those without disabilities. Previous school-based efforts to promote positive peer interactions among students with and without disabilities have included individual skill development and broader initiatives such as inclusive school practices. In the current study, we investigate the effects of cooperative learning (CL) on peer relationships, peer academic supports, and classroom engagement of middle school students with and without disabilities over two years. Using 4 waves of data from a cluster randomized trial of middle schools, we hypothesized that CL would create positive gains in study outcomes among all students, but we anticipated that effects would be more pronounced among students with disabilities. Results confirmed these hypotheses and highlighted the potential role of CL in creating greater social integration among students with and without disabilities. The implications of these findings for practitioners and policymakers are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: People with cystic fibrosis (PwCF) have experienced substantial improvements in health following use of cystic fibrosis transmembrane conductance regulator (CFTR) modulator therapies. However, less is known about how modulator therapies impact well-being., Methods: We used a cross-sectional observational study to identify relationships between CFTR modulator therapies, health-related quality of life (HRQoL), and well-being. Adult PwCF and caregivers of children with CF completed the Wellness in the Modulator Era (Well-ME) survey between June 22 and July 31, 2022. HRQoL was measured with PROMIS Global 10/Global 7 + 2 Parent Proxy. We used a mixed methods analysis to compare experiences and concerns of PwCF who currently (n = 665), no longer (n = 51), or never (n = 184) took modulator therapy., Results: Adult PwCF taking a modulator (n = 416) reported better PROMIS global physical health than those who no longer (n = 37) or never took a modulator (n = 94) and better PROMIS global mental health than those who never took a modulator. Caregiver-reported HRQoL was similar across children with CF who currently, no longer, or never took a modulator. PwCF taking a modulator reported larger improvements in physical health, quality of life, social well-being, and treatment burden than those who no longer or never took a modulator. Nearly one-quarter (23 %) of PwCF taking modulator therapy reported worsening of mental well-being., Conclusions: This study expands our knowledge of well-being among PwCF in the CFTR modulator era as reported by patients and parents. Findings lay the groundwork for establishing future research priorities, policy efforts, and communications in areas that improve well-being for PwCF., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors of this manuscript would like to disclose the following conflict of interest: E.A. reports a salary from the Cystic Fibrosis Foundation. T.K. reports grants from the Cystic Fibrosis Foundation and the National Institutes of Health and consulting fees from the Cystic Fibrosis Foundation. J.K. reports grants from the Cystic Fibrosis Foundation (VANCIT23AO-LAD and NELSON20QI0). C.L. receives an honorarium from the Cystic Fibrosis Foundation for time spent developing a survey. C.R. reports a salary from the Cystic Fibrosis Foundation. E.Y. reports a salary from the Cystic Fibrosis Foundation. A.V.C. reports grants from the Cystic Fibrosis Foundation (VANCIT23AO-LAD and NELSON20QI0), along with an honorarium and reimbursement for personal travel expenses to attend the 2023 CF Foundation Therapeutics Development Network meeting. J.A. reports funding support from the Cystic Fibrosis Foundation and the National Institute of Health, grants from the Cystic Fibrosis Foundation and the National Institute of Health, consulting fees from Anagram Therapeutics, and holds a leadership role in The Obesity Society. C.B. reports grants to her institution from the Cystic Fibrosis Foundation, Vertex Pharmaceuticals, and AstraZeneca, and serves as a board member of the Cystic Fibrosis Foundation's Indiana Chapter. J.C. receives a salary from the Cystic Fibrosis Foundation. R.C. reports an honorarium from the Cystic Fibrosis Foundation for time spent developing a survey. C.F. reports a Cystic Fibrosis Foundation Center Grant for salary support as a CF center director and for the Cystic Fibrosis Foundation STRC. A.G. reports grants from the Cystic Fibrosis Foundation, Dutch Cystic Fibrosis Foundation, National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, and Vertex Pharmaceuticals, along with consulting fees and honoraria paid directly from Vertex Pharmaceuticals, Saudi Pediatric Pulmonology Association, and Virginia Commonwealth Universit, along with support to attend meetings from Cystic Fibrosis Foundation, European Cystic Fibrosis Society, French Cystic Fibrosis Society, as well as a Leadership position at European Cystic Fibrosis Society committee and Cystic Fibrosis Foundation committee chair, both providing institutional funding. C.G. reports funding and grants from the National Institutes of Health, FDA, and the Cystic Fibrosis Foundation, along with Consulting fees paid directly from Enterprise Therapeutics Honoraria from Gilead Sciences and Vertex Pharmaceutical, and support to attend meetings from Vertex Pharmaceuticals and Enterprise Therapeutics, as well as Serving as a DSMB Chair for a trial supported by Novartis and the European Commission. Deputy Editor, Annals of the ATS, and Stock in Air Therapeutics. All other authors have nothing to disclose, (Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier B.V.)