The present research investigated the relation between the use of positive, negative and instrumental humour in the context of romantic relationships and relational well-being as assessed by positive and negative patterns of conflict resolution behaviour. A sample of 116 heterosexual married couples completed scales of relational humour use as well as conflict resolution behaviour. Behaviour of couples while attempting to resolve a relationship based conflict was also coded by independent raters. Actor-Partner Interdependence Model (APIM) analyses showed patterns of actor and partner effects for each type of humour use. Specifically, positive humour use of both partners predicted more positive conflict resolution, whereas negative humour use of both partners predicted less positive conflict resolution. Additionally, instrumental humour use of both partners seemed to predict greater apathy during conflict resolution. Implications for considering couple humor use, assessed for both partners of the dyad, for understanding relational well-being are discussed.
Background: Risky behaviors are common in Huntington’s disease (HD) and can lead to significant adverse consequences. However, the prevalence and scope of these symptoms have not been studied systematically, and no empirically validated measures are available to screen for them. Objective: To test a novel screening tool designed to assess risk-taking behaviors in HD. Methods: We administered the Risk Behavior Questionnaire (RBQ-HD) to HD patients and caregivers at Vanderbilt University Medical Center between 2018-2019. Patients completed the questionnaire based on self-report; caregivers provided collateral reports. Clinical and demographic information were obtained from the electronic medical record. Results: 60 patients and 60 caregivers completed the RBQ-HD. 80% of patients (n = 48) and 91.7% of caregivers (n = 60) reported at least one risky behavior. Adverse social behaviors, impulsive/compulsive behaviors, and reckless driving were the most common behavioral domains reported. Male patients were more likely to report risky behaviors than females (92.3% vs. 70.6%, p = 0.04). The number of risky behaviors reported by patients and caregivers was negatively correlated with patient age (r = –0.32, p = 0.01; r = –0.47, p = 0.0001, respectively). Patient and caregiver reports were highly correlated in matched pairs (n = 30; r = 0.63, p = 0.0002). Conclusion: These findings emphasize that risky behaviors are highly prevalent in HD and can be effectively identified through the use of a novel screening measure. We hypothesize that early pathological involvement of frontostriatal and mesolimbic networks may be important factors in the development of these behaviors.
Paralinguistic style, involving features of speech such as pitch and volume, is an important aspect of one’s communicative competence. However, little is known about the behavioral traits and cognitive skills that relate to these aspects of speech. This study examined the extent to which ADHD traits and executive functioning (EF) related to the paralinguistic styles of 8- to 12-year-old children and their mothers. Data was collected via parent report (ADHD traits), independent laboratory tasks of EF (working memory, inhibitory control, and cognitive flexibility), and an interactive problem-solving task (completed by mothers and children jointly) which was coded for paralinguistic speech elements (i.e., pitch level/variability; volume level/variability). Dyadic data analyses revealed that elevated ADHD traits in children were associated with a more exaggerated paralinguistic style (i.e., elevated and more variable pitch/volume) for both mothers and children. Mothers’ paralinguistic style was additionally predicted by an interaction of mothers’ and children’s ADHD traits, such that mothers with elevated ADHD traits showed exaggerated paralinguistic styles particularly when their children also had elevated ADHD traits. Highlighting a cognitive mechanism, children with weaker inhibitory control showed more exaggerated paralinguistic styles.
Background: Safer-at-home orders during the COVID-19 pandemic altered the structure of clinical care for Huntington’s disease (HD) patients. This shift provided an opportunity to identify limitations in the current healthcare infrastructure and how these may impact the health and well-being of persons with HD. Objective: The study objectives were to assess the feasibility of remote healthcare delivery in HD patients, to identify socioeconomic factors which may explain differences in feasibility and to evaluate the impact of safer-at-home orders on HD patient stress levels. Methods: This observational study of a clinical HD population during the ‘safer-at-home’ orders asked patients or caregivers about their current access to healthcare resources and patient stress levels. A chart review allowed for an assessment of socioeconomic status and characterization of HD severity. Results: Two-hundred and twelve HD patients were contacted with 156 completing the survey. During safer-at-home orders, the majority of HD patients were able to obtain medications and see a physician; however, 25% of patients would not commit to regular telehealth visits, and less than 50% utilized an online healthcare platform. We found that 37% of participants were divorced/single, 39% had less than a high school diploma, and nearly 20% were uninsured or on low-income health insurance. Patient stress levels correlated with disease burden. Conclusion: A significant portion of HD participants were not willing to participate in telehealth services. Potential explanations for these limitations may include socioeconomic barriers and caregiving structure. These observations illustrate areas for clinical care improvement to address healthcare disparities in the HD community.
The aim of the study was to determine the incidence, type, severity, preventability, and contributing factors of nonroutine events (NREs)-events perceived by care providers or skilled observers as a deviations from optimal care based on the clinical situation-in the perioperative (i.e., preoperative, operative, and postoperative) care of surgical neonates in the neonatal intensive care unit and operating room.Methods: A prospective observational study of noncardiac surgical neonates, who received preoperative and postoperative neonatal intensive care unit care, was conducted at an urban academic children's hospital between November 1, 2016, and March 31, 2018. One hundred twenty-nine surgical cases in 109 neonates were observed. The incidence and description of NREs were collected via structured researcher-administered survey tool of involved clinicians. Primary measurements included clinicians' ratings of NRE severity and contributory factors and trained research assistants' ratings of preventability.Results: One or more NREs were reported in 101 (78%) of 129 observed cases for 247 total NREs. Clinicians reported 2 (2) (median, interquartile range) NREs per NRE case with a maximum severity of 3 (1) (possible range = 1-5). Trained research assistants rated 47% of NREs as preventable and 11% as severe and preventable. The relative risks for National Surgical Quality Improvement Programpediatric major morbidity and 30-day mortality were 1.17 (95% confidence interval = 0.92-1.48) and 1.04 (95% confidence interval = 1.00-1.08) in NRE cases versus non-NRE cases. Conclusions:The incidence of NREs in neonatal perioperative care at an academic children's hospital was high and of variable severity with a myriad of contributory factors.
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.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.