A 22-item Likert-type rating scale for parents was developed for screening a broad range of specific sleep-related behaviors of elementary school children. The prevalence of these behaviors was reported by parents for boys (n = 459) and girls (n = 411) in three age groups, less than 8.5 yr., between 8.5 and 11.5 yr., and greater than 11.5 yr. For all age groups, the most prevalent behaviors were restlessness, waking up at night, pleasant dreams, getting up to go to the bathroom, talking while asleep, and complaints about not being able to sleep, while the least frequent were rhythmical movements and crying while asleep. The self-reports suggest that many of the behaviors are underestimated in the literature. Some sex and age differences were found, but the number of siblings, birth order, change in family structure, and educational status of father and mother were unrelated to the sleep variables. Test-retest reliabilities of self-reports by these parents to individual items were adequate.

Aims: To compare Canadian provinces across 10 research-based alcohol policy and program dimensions. Design and Measures:The 10 Canadian provinces were assessed on the following 10 policy dimensions: alcohol pricing; alcohol control system; physical availability; drinking and driving; marketing and advertising; legal drinking age; screening, brief intervention, and referrals; server training, challenge, and refusal programs; provincial alcohol strategy; warning labels and signs. Data were collected from official documents, including provincial legislation, regulations, and policy, and strategy documents. Three international experts on alcohol policy contributed to refining the protocol. Provincial scores were independently determined by two team members along a 10-point scale for each dimension, and the scores were expressed as a percentage of the ideal. Weighting of dimensions according to scope of impact and effectiveness was applied to obtain the final scores. National and provincial scores were calculated for each dimension and consolidated into overall averages.Findings: Overall, the consolidated national mean is 47.2% of the ideal, with Ontario scoring highest at 55.9%, and Québec lowest at 36.2%. Across dimensions, Legal Drinking Age and Challenge and Refusal Programs scored highest at 75% and 61%, respectively, while Warning Labels and Signs scored lowest at 18% of the ideal. Pricing, rated third highest among dimensions at 57%, should nevertheless remain a priority for improvement, given it is weighted highest in terms of effectiveness and scope. Conclusions and Implications:Policy dimension scores vary among the provinces, with substantial room for improvement in all. Since spring 2013, several provinces have taken steps to implement specific alcohol policies. Concerted action involving multiple stakeholders and alcohol policies is required to reduce the burden of alcohol problems across Canada.

No abstract

Cannabis and alcohol use each appear to increase the risk of a non-fatal injury-related crash among bicyclists, and point to the need for improved efforts to deter substance use prior to cycling, with the help of regulation, increased education, and greater public awareness. However, cannabis results should be interpreted with caution, as the observed association with crash risk was contingent on how consumption was measured.

While examples of evidence-based alcohol pricing policies can be found in every jurisdiction in Canada, significant inter-provincial variation leaves substantial unrealised potential for further reducing alcohol-related harm and costs. This comparative assessment of alcohol price policies provides clear indications of how individual provinces could adjust their pricing policies and practices to improve public health and safety. [Giesbrecht N, Wettlaufer A, Thomas G, Stockwell T, Thompson K, April N, Asbridge M, Cukier S, Mann R, McAllister J, Murie A, Pauley C, Plamondon L, Vallance K. Pricing of alcohol in Canada: A comparison of provincial policies and harm-reduction opportunities. Drug Alcohol Rev 2016;35:289-297].

Synergic@Home is a feasibility study evaluating the effects of exercise and cognitive interventions for the prevention of dementia in at-risk individuals over age 60. The COVID-19 pandemic changed the study’s methods, with standardized neuropsychological tests needing to be administered virtually. Experience and research into the viability of neuropsychological assessments administered virtually is limited. After receiving permission to adapt the tests for virtual administration, a neuropsychologist, project managers, and research coordinators developed their approach. A PowerPoint presentation using text and visual stimuli from the tests was developed with on-screen instructions for the raters. An iterative development process involved feedback from the team in order to maximize the fidelity of these methods compared to in-person administration. Mock assessments supervised by a neuropsychologist further refined the methods and confirmed rater adherence to standardized procedures. A secure videoconferencing platform meeting privacy requirements was used. Dual monitors for the raters provided instructions on one monitor while stimuli for the participant was on the second monitor. The participant could only see the stimuli. This method of administering neuropsychological assessment, the Feasibility of Research with Online Neuropsychological Testing (FRONT), is being used to evaluate older adult participants in Synergic@Home. Results from this feasibility study may set the stage for new research methodologies and/or clinical evaluations in the future. This project is funded by the New Brunswick Healthy Seniors Pilot Project and the Canadian Consortium on Neurodegeneration in Aging (with grants from Public Health Agency of Canada and the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, with additional funding partners).

No abstract

The Participative Decision-making Scale for Nurses was administered before and after a six-week interval to 30 nursing students in the final semester of their programme. Reliability coefficients for the four subscales, with the exception of the clinical subscale, were of reasonable magnitude (range .42 to .62).