The Stimulant Selective Severity Assessment: A replication and exploratory extension of the Cocaine Selective Severity Assessment.

BACKGROUND: Cocaine and methamphetamine have similar withdrawal symptoms and many individuals concurrently use both substances; however, no measures concurrently assess withdrawal from multiple stimulants. OBJECTIVES: This study's aim was to explore the Stimulant Selective Severity Assessment (SSSA), a modified version of the Cocaine Selective Severity Assessment (CSSA), in a sample of stimulant users to determine if it can assess withdrawal symptoms in users of one or more stimulants. METHODS: Baseline data were analyzed from the STimulant Reduction Intervention using Dosed Exercise trial, a multisite randomized clinical trial that evaluated exercise versus health education on drug use outcomes in individuals with stimulant use disorders. Data were analyzed for internal consistency, construct validity, and scale dimensionality. RESULTS: Internal consistency for the full sample was good (α = 0.81; N = 302), with similar alphas in Cocaine (0.81; n = 177) and Cocaine/Other Stimulant (0.82; n = 92) groups, but with much lower alpha for the group without cocaine use (Other Stimulant, i.e., primarily methamphetamine, α = 0.66; n = 32). Support for construct validity was evidenced by significant positive correlations (r = 0.17 to 0.67) with measures of stimulant craving, depressive symptoms, and pain. Four factors were revealed. Conclusions/Importance: The Stimulant Selective Severity Assessment is a new measure that can be used to assess withdrawal symptoms in users of cocaine or cocaine plus methamphetamine, but it should not be administered to users of methamphetamine only.

Raising Bilingual Children: A Qualitative Study of Parental Attitudes, Beliefs, and Intended Behaviors.

We examined parental preferences in raising Spanish/English bilingual children. We identified factors influencing their decisions, and the strategies used to promote bilingualism. Focus groups were conducted with Spanish-primary-language parents of children 3 to 7 years old. These groups were audiotaped and transcribed. Three reviewers independently analyzed transcripts for themes using margin-coding and grounded theory; disagreements were resolved by consensus. Thirteen Spanish-primary-language parents participated in two focus groups. The results show that parents wanted their children to be bilingual. Parents also stated that the benefits of bilingualism included better career opportunities, and preservation of culture and native language. Family members, schools, and prior parental experiences influenced the parents' decisions to raise bilingual children. Parents preferred English-only school classes and to teach Spanish at home. Strategies identified for raising bilingual children included reading bilingual books and having children speak only Spanish at home. Schools and pediatricians are used as resources.

Why adolescents fight: a qualitative study of youth perspectives on fighting and its prevention.

OBJECTIVE: To identify risk factors for fighting, factors that protect against fighting, and strategies to prevent fighting, among adolescents who fight and those uninvolved in fighting. METHODS: Focus groups were conducted with middle and high school students, stratified by fighting (fighter/nonfighter) status, race/ethnicity, and gender. Groups were audiotaped, transcribed, and analyzed using margin coding and thematic content analysis. Themes were independently identified by 3 coders; disagreements were resolved by consensus. RESULTS: The 65 participants in the 12 focus groups were 13 to 17 years old. Reasons for fighting include self-defense, to gain/maintain respect, or anger; having goals for the future is protective. Nonfighters state that their parents condone fighting only when physically attacked and that they teach adolescents strategies to avoid fighting. Fighters describe mixed messages from parents, and pro-fighting attitudes and modeling of aggressive behavior among some family members. Nonfighters avoid fighting by ignoring insults or walking away. Fighters feel unable to use nonviolent conflict-resolution methods effectively. Peers may instigate or encourage fights. Suggested prevention strategies include anger-management and conflict-resolution programs, relationships with caring adults, and physicians counseling youth about the consequences of fighting. CONCLUSIONS: Nonfighters use various strategies to avoid fighting, whereas fighters are aware of few alternatives to fighting. Conflicting parental messages about fighting may enhance the likelihood of fighting. Physicians can counsel youth about the negative consequences of fighting. Interventions that teach anger management and conflict resolution, promote adolescent self-efficacy for using nonviolent strategies, and address parental attitudes about fighting may be effective in preventing fighting.