Tele-neuropsychological Assessment of Children and Young People: A Systematic Review

The coronavirus pandemic identified a clinical need for pediatric tele-neuropsychology (TeleNP) assessment. However, due to limited research, clinicians have had little information to develop, adapt, or select reliable pediatric assessments for TeleNP. This preliminary systematic review aimed to examine the feasibility of pediatric TeleNP assessment alongside (1) patient/family acceptability, (2) reliability, and (3) the quality of the literature. Between May 2021 and November 2022, manual searches of PubMed, PsycINFO, and Google Scholar were conducted using terms related to "pediatric” and "tele-neuropsychology.” After extracting relevant papers with samples aged 0–22 years, predefined exclusion criteria were applied. Quality assessment was completed using the AXIS appraisal tool (91% rater-agreement). Twenty-one studies were included in the review, with reported qualitative and quantitative data on the feasibility, reliability, and acceptability extracted. Across included studies, TeleNP was completed via telephone/video conference with participants either at home, in a local setting accompanied by an assistant, or in a different room but in the same building as the assessor. Pediatric TeleNP was generally reported to be feasible (e.g., minimal behavioral differences) and acceptable (e.g., positive feedback). Nineteen studies conducted some statistical analyses to assess reliability. Most observed no significant difference between in-person and TeleNP for most cognitive domains (i.e., IQ), with a minority finding variable reliability for some tests (e.g., attention, speech, visuo-spatial). Limited reporting of sex-assigned birth, racialized identity, and ethnicity reduced the quality and generalizability of the literature. To aid clinical interpretations, studies should assess underexamined cognitive domains (e.g., processing speed) with larger, more inclusive samples. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40817-023-00144-6.

Psychologists as leaders in equitable science: Applications of antiracism and community participatory strategies in a pediatric behavioral medicine clinical trial.

Psychologists have an ethical responsibility to advance health equity and can play a significant role in improving health care experiences for families racialized as Black, including those with sickle cell disease (SCD), a group of genetic blood disorders primarily affecting communities of color. Parents of children with SCD report experiences of stigma and discrimination due to racism in the health care system. The current commentary describes the application of antiracism and participatory strategies to the research design, implementation, and dissemination of a behavioral medicine clinical trial (Engage-HU; NCT03442114) of shared decision-making (SDM) for pediatric patients with SCD, including (a) the development of a research question to promote justice for racialized groups; (b) a focus on "redressing imbalances" through SDM and a multidisciplinary, inclusive research team led by a Black psychologist; (c) community participatory approaches through the integration of stakeholder feedback across the study; and (d) centering context by attending to structural realities in response to the COVID-19 and racism pandemics. With attention to the fact that most primary caregivers of children with SCD are Black women, an intersectionality lens was applied. Implications and considerations for psychologists working to advance health equity in medical settings are also discussed. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

Attitudes About COVID-19 and Health (ATTACH): Online Survey and Mixed Methods Study.

BACKGROUND: Behavioral mitigation strategies to slow the spread of COVID-19 have resulted in sweeping lifestyle changes, with short- and long-term psychological, well-being, and quality of life implications. The Attitudes About COVID-19 and Health (ATTACH) study focuses on understanding attitudes and beliefs while considering the impact on mental and physical health and the influence of broader demographic and geographic factors on attitudes, beliefs, and mental health burden. OBJECTIVE: In this assessment of our first wave of data collection, we provide baseline cohort description of the ATTACH study participants in the United Kingdom, the United States, and Mexico. Additionally, we assess responses to daily poll questions related to COVID-19 and conduct a cross-sectional analysis of baseline assessments collected in the UK between June 26 and October 31, 2020. METHODS: The ATTACH study uses smartphone app technology and online survey data collection. Participants completed poll questions related to COVID-19 2 times daily and a monthly survey assessing mental health, social isolation, physical health, and quality of life. Poll question responses were graphed using 95% Clopper-Pearson (exact) tests with 95% CIs. Pearson correlations, hierarchical linear regression analyses, and generalized linear models assessed relationships, predictors of self-reported outcomes, and group differences, respectively. RESULTS: By October 31, 2020, 1405, 80, and 90 participants had consented to participate in the UK, United States, and Mexico, respectively. Descriptive data for the UK daily poll questions indicated that participants generally followed social distancing measures, but worry and negative impacts on families increased as the pandemic progressed. Although participants generally reported feeling that the reasons for current measures had been made clear, there was low trust that the government was doing everything in its power to meet public needs. In the UK, 1282 participants also completed a monthly survey (94.99% [1326/1396] White, 72.22% [1014/1404] female, and 20.12% [277/1377] key or essential workers); 18.88% (242/1282) of UK participants reported a preexisting mental health disorder, 31.36% (402/1282) reported a preexisting chronic medical illness, and 35.11% (493/1404) were aged over 65; 57.72% (740/1282) of participants reported being more sedentary since the pandemic began, and 41.89% (537/1282) reported reduced access to medical care. Those with poorer mental health outcomes lived in more deprived neighborhoods, in larger households (Ps<.05), had more preexisting mental health disorders and medical conditions, and were younger than 65 years (all Ps<.001). CONCLUSIONS: Communities who have been exposed to additional harm during the COVID-19 pandemic were experiencing worse mental outcomes. Factors including having a medical condition, or living in a deprived neighborhood or larger household were associated with heightened risk. Future longitudinal studies should investigate the link between COVID-19 exposure, mental health, and sociodemographic and residential characteristics.