Based on new evidence, the renamed Integrative Trajectory Model includes phases corresponding with medical events, adds family-centered trajectories, reaffirms a competency-based framework, and suggests updated assessment and intervention implications.
Objective
In response to the rapidly unfolding coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic in spring 2020, we developed a caregiver-report measure to understand the extent to which children and families were exposed to events related to COVID-19 and their perceptions of its impact. This article reports on the factor structure and psychometric properties of this measure.
Methods
The COVID-19 Exposure and Family Impact Scales (CEFIS) were developed by a multidisciplinary, multi-institutional team using a rapid iterative process. Data from 1805 caregivers recruited from 28 programs at 15 institutions across the United States were collected from May—September 2020. We examined the underlying structure of the CEFIS using exploratory factor analyses and its internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha).
Results
Participants reported a range of COVID-19-related events (M = 8.71 events of 25). On the bidirectional 4-point impact scale, mean scores were mostly above the midpoint, indicating a slightly negative impact. Cronbach’s alpha was excellent for Exposure (α = .80) and Impact (α = .92). Factor analysis identified six factors for Exposure (COVID-19 experiences, Access to essentials, Disruptions to living conditions, Loss of income, Family caregiving and activities, and Designation as an essential worker). There were three factors for Impact (Personal well-being, Family interactions, and Distress).
Discussion
The CEFIS has strong factors assessing Exposure to events related to COVID-19, and the Impact of these events on families of children in pediatric healthcare. These initial validation data support use of the CEFIS for measuring the effect of the pandemic.
We examined prospective prediction from parent- and teacher-reported Oppositional Defiant Disorder (ODD) symptoms to parent-reported ODD, Conduct Disorder (CD), Major Depressive Disorder (MDD), and Generalized Anxiety Disorder (GAD) symptoms and whether child executive functioning abilities moderated these relations among an urban, low income sample of first-third grade children (N=87). Time 1 parent-reported ODD predicted each Time 2 outcome. Time 1 teacher-reported ODD predicted Time 2 CD and MDD symptoms. After controlling for Time 1 co-occurring symptoms, only prediction from Time 1 teacher-reported ODD to CD and MDD symptoms remained significant. Child executive functioning abilities moderated relations between Time 1 parent-reported ODD and Time 2 ODD, and Time 1 teacher-reported ODD and Time 2 CD and MDD. Among children with better executive functioning abilities, higher Time 1 ODD was associated with higher Time 2 symptoms.
Indices of deviant peer group involvement are inconsistent and confound type, frequency, and severity of deviant peer behaviors. These measurement approaches thus obfuscate potential meaningful differences in deviant peer involvement in terms of subtypes, developmental patterns, and long-term outcomes. The current study employed latent class analysis to derive subtypes of deviant peer involvement and examined relations to substance use disorder in adulthood, a common outcome of deviant peer involvement. Youth (76% Caucasian) completed assessments across four time points: ages 10-12 years (Time 1; N = 775, 71% male), 12-14 years (Time 2; n = 649, 72% male), 16 years (Time 3; n = 613, 73% male), and 22 years (Time 4; n = 425, 71% male). At Times 1 to 3, participants completed an interview assessing deviant peer involvement. At Time 4, participants completed a structured interview assessing substance use disorder. Classes of youth with different profiles of deviant peer associations were derived at Times 1, 2, and 3. Classes varied by type (conduct problems vs. substance use) and severity of deviant peer behavior. Youth reported higher levels of involvement with deviant peers across adolescence, suggesting that some of these deviant peer behaviors may be normative. Earlier involvement with deviant peers and involvement with groups defined by severe conduct problems and substance use were related to the greatest risk for substance use disorder at Time 4. Type and severity of peer deviant behavior differentially relate to long-term risk for substance use disorder and should be included in screening and assessment for risk across adolescence.
Objective
To understand the impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on adolescents and young adults (AYAs), we adapted the COVID-19 Exposure and Family Impact Scales (CEFIS; Kazak et al., 2021) for AYAs. Here, we report on the development, structure, and psychometric properties of the CEFIS-AYA.
Methods
The CEFIS-AYA was developed by a multidisciplinary, multi-institutional team using a rapid iterative process. Data from 3,912 AYAs from 21 programs at 16 institutions across the United States were collected from May 2020 to April 2021. We examined the underlying structure of the CEFIS-AYA using principal component analysis (PCA), calculated internal consistencies, and explored differences in scores by gender and age.
Results
Participants reported exposure to a range of COVID-19-related events (M = 9.08 events, of 28). On the bidirectional 4-point Impact scale, mean item scores were mostly above the midpoint, indicating a slightly negative impact. Kuder–Richardson 20/Cronbach’s Alpha was good for Exposure (α = .76) and excellent for Impact (α = .93). PCA identified seven factors for Exposure (Severe COVID-19, Loss of Income, Limited Access to Essentials, COVID-19 Exposure, Disruptions to Activities, Disruptions to Living Conditions, and Designation as an Essential Worker) and five for Impact (Self and Family Relationships, Physical Well-Being, Emotional Well-Being, Social Well-Being, and Distress). Gender and age differences in CEFIS-AYA scores were identified.
Discussion
Initial reliability data are strong and support use of the CEFIS-AYA for measuring the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on AYAs in research and clinical care.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.