No abstract

Objective Parents and children affected by pediatric cancer are at risk for psychological distress, including depression, anxiety, and post-traumatic stress. A link is believed to exist between parent and child distress; however, no systematic analysis of this relationship has occurred. A meta-analysis was conducted to assess the relationship between parent and child distress among families affected by pediatric cancer. Methods A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted using EBSCO (searching PsycINFO, MEDLINE, Academic search Premiere, and Health Source: Nursing/Academic Edition) and PubMed. The initial search yielded a total of 29,118 articles. Inclusion criteria were that studies assessed the relation between parent and child distress in the context of pediatric cancer, were written in English, and were published in peer-reviewed journals. 28 articles met inclusion criteria. Results A statistically significant association was found between overall parent and child distress (r = .32, p < .001), such that increased parent-reported distress was associated with increased distress in their children. Significant relationships were also present among each type of parental distress (i.e., depression, anxiety, post-traumatic stress, and global distress; rs = .31–.51, ps < .001) and overall child distress. Moderation analyses via meta-regression indicated that parent proxy-report of child symptoms was associated with a stronger relationship between parent and child distress than child self-report of their own distress. Conclusions Aligned with the social–ecological framework, familial factors appear to be highly relevant in understanding distress following pediatric cancer diagnosis. Indeed, greater parent distress was associated with greater child distress.

Abstract Objective To present a topical review of minority stressors contributing to psychosocial and physical health disparities in transgender and gender expansive (TGE) adolescents. Methods We conducted a topical review of original research studies focused on distal stressors (e.g., discrimination; victimization; rejection; nonaffirmation), proximal stressors (e.g., expected rejection; identity concealment; internalized transphobia), and resilience factors (e.g., community connectedness; pride; parental support) and mental and physical health outcomes. Results Extant literature suggests that TGE adolescents experience a host of gender minority stressors and are at heightened risk for negative health outcomes; however, limited research has directly applied the gender minority stress framework to the experiences of TGE adolescents. Most research to date has focused on distal minority stressors and single path models to negative health outcomes, which do not account for the complex interplay between chronic minority stress, individual resilience factors, and health outcomes. Research examining proximal stressors and resilience factors is particularly scarce. Conclusions The gender minority stress model is a helpful framework for understanding how minority stressors contribute to health disparities and poor health outcomes among TGE adolescents. Future research should include multiple path models that examine relations between gender minority stressors, resilience factors, and health outcomes in large, nationally representative samples of TGE adolescents. Clinically, adaptations of evidence-based interventions to account for gender minority stressors may increase effectiveness of interventions for TGE adolescents and reduce health disparities in this population of vulnerable youth.

No abstract

No abstract