Sibling bullying reported by emerging adults: Profiling the prevalence, roles, and forms in a cross-country investigation.

Prevalence estimates of sibling bullying indicate it occurs more frequently and with more negative consequences than peer bullying, yet many countries do not track or investigate the phenomenon. University students from Argentina, Estonia, and the United States were surveyed to investigate their retrospective experiences involving sibling bullying, how often it occurred, the roles held, and the forms communicated. In the aggregated data, roughly 50 % of the sampled emerging adults (N = 3477) reported experience with sibling bullying, with the dual role of bully-victim being the most frequently reported role held by males and females, with the second role being bully for males and victim for females. Verbal forms of bullying were most frequently reported by males and females, with physical, relational, and technological forms occurring less frequently, indicating the importance of studying the messages conveyed during bullying incidents. Variations between biological sex, bullying role and form were detected that indicate siblings experience bullying in ways that are unique from peer bullying. Country comparisons revealed bullying frequencies varied among males and females, suggesting sibling bullying experiences are likely to be culturally influenced. More research is warranted to examine the negative impact bullying has on sibling psycho-social development and the potential transfer to non-familial relationships and contexts. Discussion of these findings and the implications for academics and practitioners alike is provided.

Talking about inequities: A comparative analysis of COVID-19 narratives in the UK, US, and Brazil.

Disproportionate mortality and morbidity burdens of the COVID-19 pandemic and coinciding media coverage of public acts of violence perpetrated against people of color in 2020 precipitated reckonings with structural inequities in global, national, and local contexts. This cross-country comparative analysis aims to describe how people voice and make sense race, racism, and privilege in their experiences with COVID-19 infection in the United States, United Kingdom, and Brazil. Anchored by continuous reflection on our individual and collective positionality, we conducted an inductive comparative analysis conceptually situated in intersectionality and critical race theory. Countries used a shared qualitative methodology to collect and analyze 166 narratives of people with experience of COVID-19 infection from 2020 to 2023. We selected 19 cases that illustrate cross-national differences in peoples' acknowledgment and narration of structural privilege and disadvantage in their observations of COVID-19 in their countries and in their personal experiences. People in the US had the most fluency with voicing race directly. In Brazil, while some respondents (especially younger people) demonstrated high racial consciousness, others struggled to identify and talk about racial relationships. In the UK, people voiced racial identifications, though often within white norms of politeness and an accompanying sense of discomfort. The findings overall illustrate moments the interview becomes or does not become a space for voicing social categories and systemic underpinnings of difference in COVID-19 infections and healthcare experiences. We reflect on cross-country differences in historical and contemporary racialized discourse and elaborate on implications of focusing on voicing in qualitative research.

Prevalence and Severity of Food Insecurity Before and During the Coronavirus Disease 2019 Pandemic Among Adults and Youth in Australia, Canada, Chile, Mexico, the United Kingdom, and the United States.

BACKGROUND: Disruptions from the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic potentially exacerbated food insecurity among adults and youth. OBJECTIVES: The objective was to examine changes in the prevalence and severity of food insecurity among adults and youth from before (2019) to during (2020) the pandemic in multiple countries. METHODS: Repeated cross-sectional data were collected among adults aged 18-100 y (n = 63,278) in 5 countries in November to December in 2018-2020 and among youth aged 10-17 y (n = 23,107) in 6 countries in November to December in 2019 and 2020. Food insecurity in the past year was captured using the Household Food Security Survey Module and the Child Food Insecurity Experiences Scale. Changes in the prevalence and severity of food insecurity were examined using logistic and generalized logit regression models, respectively. Models included age, gender, racial-ethnic identity, and other sociodemographic characteristics associated with food insecurity to adjust for possible sample differences across waves. Models were weighted to reflect each country's population. RESULTS: Adults [adjusted OR (AOR): 1.15; 95% CI: 1.02, 1.31] and youth (AOR: 1.43; 95% CI: 1.19, 1.71) in Mexico were more likely to live in food-insecure households in 2020 compared to 2019. Adults in Australia (AOR: 0.81; 95% CI: 0.72, 0.92) and Canada (AOR: 0.87; 95% CI: 0.77, 0.99) were less likely to live in food-insecure households in 2020. Trends in severity aligned with changes in prevalence, with some exceptions. Youth in Australia (AOR: 2.24; 95% CI: 1.65, 3.02) and the United States (AOR: 1.39; 95% CI: 1.04, 1.86) were more likely to have many compared with no experiences of food insecurity in 2020 compared to 2019. There was no evidence of change among adults and youth in the remaining countries. CONCLUSIONS: Except for Mexico, few changes in food insecurity among adults and youth were observed from before to during the COVID-19 pandemic. Action is needed to support households at risk of food insecurity.

Cross-country validity of the Alberta Infant Motor Scale using a Brazilian sample.

BACKGROUND: Previous validity studies of the Alberta Infant Motor Scale (AIMS), using raw scores and percentile curves for group comparisons, showed that infants in Brazil achieved gross motor milestones at later ages. Validity of the AIMS norms were later reassessed using a logistic regression model that placed the AIMS items on an age scale. OBJECTIVES: Our study examined the validity of the AIMS norms for Brazilian infants using the recommended method for calculating and comparing item locations. METHODS: Data from 732 Brazilian infants (2009-11), 3 days to 18 months old, were compared to the AIMS normative sample (n=2202). Logistic regression placed the AIMS items of both samples on age scales representing the age at which 50% of infants passed an item and compared the two datasets. Pearson correlation coefficient tested the association across samples. RESULTS: 47 of the 58 AIMS items met the criterion for stable regression to calculate item locations of the Brazilian dataset. Based on the age when 50% of the infants passed a criterion, most of the items from the Brazilian sample (n=28) differed by two weeks or less compared to the Canadian normative sample. CONCLUSION: The sequence and age for the emergence of AIMS items were similar between the Brazilian and Canadian samples. Canadian norms are appropriate for clinical decisions and research with Brazilian infants.

The country-level effects of drinking, heavy drinking and drink prices on pre-drinking: An international comparison of 25 countries.

INTRODUCTION AND AIMS: The practice and adverse consequences of pre-drinking have been documented within a dozen countries, but little remains known about the differences between countries or the country-specific determinants of pre-drinking. This study aims to estimate the percentage of pre-drinkers in different countries and the impact of country-level indicators such as the price of alcohol and the prevalence of drinkers and of heavy drinkers. DESIGN AND METHODS: Using data from the Global Drug Survey, the percentage of pre-drinkers was estimated for 25 countries from 65 126 respondents. Bivariate and multivariate multilevel models were used to model the impact of the on-premise/off-premise drinks price ratio, the prevalence of current drinkers and of heavy drinkers on the percentage of pre-drinkers. RESULTS: The estimated percentage of pre-drinkers per country ranged from 17.7% (Greece) to 85.4% (Ireland). Across all countries, the higher the prevalence of current drinkers, the higher the percentage of pre-drinkers. In addition, an interaction between the prevalence of heavy drinkers and the price ratio was found. In countries with a low price ratio, the higher the prevalence of heavy drinkers, the higher the percentage of pre-drinkers. The opposite effect was observed in countries with high price ratios. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: Pre-drinking appears to be a worldwide phenomenon. The significant effects of all three indicators demonstrate the role of country-level determinants underpinning the prevalence of pre-drinking across countries. Policy makers could use the reported findings for initiating campaigns to reduce pre-drinking behaviour. [Labhart F, Ferris J, Winstock A, Kuntsche E. The country-level effects of drinking, heavy drinking and drink prices on pre-drinking: An international comparison of 25 countries.

A cross-national factor analytic comparison of three models of PANSS symptoms in schizophrenia.

The 30-item Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) is used worldwide in the assessment of symptom severity in schizophrenia. The present study uses confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) to compare three different factorial models and to evaluate the best-fitting representation of schizophrenia symptom structure on the PANSS across four samples of patients diagnosed with schizophrenia from the US (the CATIE schizophrenia trial), São Paulo, Brazil, and from Beijing and Changsha, China. We examine the goodness of fit of several previously proposed models. The traditional trifactorial model for the PANSS and two five-factor models were evaluated using absolute and incremental indices. Single group CFA found that the five-factor model proposed by NIMH researchers based on an extensive literature review demonstrates the best fit in each of the four samples. This model used 20 of the 30 PANSS items grouped into five factors: positive, negative, disorganized, excited, and depressed symptoms. Subgroups defined by age, gender, nationality, hospitalization status, and severity of illness also did not differ in overall symptom structure as assessed by several standard indices. Our findings suggest that the five factor NIMH model showed the best representation among all four samples from different countries and potentially contrasting cultures.