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.

BackgroundFitness trackers can engage users through automated self-monitoring of physical activity. Studies evaluating the utility of fitness trackers are limited among adolescents, who are often difficult to engage in weight management treatment and are heavy technology users.ObjectiveWe conducted a pilot randomized trial to describe the impact of providing adolescents and caregivers with fitness trackers as an adjunct to treatment in a tertiary care weight management clinic on adolescent fitness tracker satisfaction, fitness tracker utilization patterns, and physical activity levels.MethodsAdolescents were randomized to 1 of 2 groups (adolescent or dyad) at their initial weight management clinic visit. Adolescents received a fitness tracker and counseling around activity data in addition to standard treatment. A caregiver of adolescents in the dyad group also received a fitness tracker. Satisfaction with the fitness tracker, fitness tracker utilization patterns, and physical activity patterns were evaluated over 3 months.ResultsA total of 88 adolescents were enrolled, with 69% (61/88) being female, 36% (32/88) black, 23% (20/88) Hispanic, and 63% (55/88) with severe obesity. Most adolescents reported that the fitness tracker was helping them meet their healthy lifestyle goals (69%) and be more motivated to achieve a healthy weight (66%). Despite this, 68% discontinued use of the fitness tracker by the end of the study. There were no significant differences between the adolescent and the dyad group in outcomes, but adolescents in the dyad group were 12.2 times more likely to discontinue using their fitness tracker if their caregiver also discontinued use of their fitness tracker (95% CI 2.4-61.6). Compared with adolescents who discontinued use of the fitness tracker during the study, adolescents who continued to use the fitness tracker recorded a higher number of daily steps in months 2 and 3 of the study (mean 5760 vs 4148 in month 2, P=.005, and mean 5942 vs 3487 in month 3, P=.002).ConclusionsDespite high levels of satisfaction with the fitness trackers, fitness tracker discontinuation rates were high, especially among adolescents whose caregivers also discontinued use of their fitness tracker. More studies are needed to determine how to sustain the use of fitness trackers among adolescents with obesity and engage caregivers in adolescent weight management interventions.

No abstract

Children ages 2 to 5 with SO appear to be more likely to be of a racial and/or ethnic minority and have greater disparities in social determinants of health than their peers and are more than twice as likely to engage in double the recommended screen time limit.