Neighborhood quality and somatic complaints among American youth

Chapman, Mimi V.

doi:10.1016/j.jadohealth.2004.02.029

Cited by 19 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…49 This gendered dimension of safety may have been less relevant for boys, whereas the adjustment to new social networks in the new neighborhoods may have been more difficult for boys than for girls, for example due to the disruption of friendships or adult role models 50 . Other processes such as family structure, parental education, child’s education needs, or parental mental health may also be important moderators or mediators of the MTO intervention, based on prior evidence that these influence youth functioning 44, 51 . Although these explanations suggest directions for future work, we did not test them in this analysis, and therefore we do not know what accounts for these different intervention effects.…”

Section: Commentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Differential Mental Health Effects of Neighborhood Relocation Among Youth in Vulnerable Families

Osypuk¹,

Tchetgen

Acevedo‐García

et al. 2012

Arch Gen Psychiatry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Context Extensive observational evidence indicates youth in high-poverty neighborhoods exhibit poor mental health, although not all children may be affected similarly. Objective To use experimental evidence to assess whether gender and family health problems modify mental health effects of moving from high- to low-poverty neighborhoods. Design, Setting, Participants The Moving to Opportunity Study, a randomized controlled trial, enrolled volunteer low-income families in public housing in 5 U.S. cities from 1994–1997. We analyze 4–7 year outcomes among youth aged 12–19 (n=2829, 89% effective response rate). Intervention Families were randomized to control (remaining in public housing) or experimental (receiving government-funded rental subsidies to move into private apartments) groups. Intent-to-treat analyses included intervention interactions by gender and health vulnerability (defined as pre-randomization health/developmental limitations or disabilities among family members). Outcome measures Past-year psychological distress (K6), and Behavioral Problems Index (BPI). Supplemental analyses used past-year major depressive disorder (MDD). Results Male gender and family health vulnerability significantly adversely modified the intervention effect on K6 (gender: p=.02, health vulnerability: p=.002); male gender, but not health vulnerability, significantly adversely modified the intervention effect on BPI (gender: p=.01, health vulnerability: p=.17). Female adolescents without baseline health vulnerabilities were the only subgroup to benefit on any outcome (K6 (B= −0.21, 95% CI: (−0.34–−0.07), p=.003); MDD (Odds Ratio =0.42 (0.20–0.85) p=0.024). For male adolescents with health vulnerabilities, intervention was associated with worse K6 (B=.26, (0.09–0.44), p=.003) and BPI (B=.24 (0.09–0.40) p=.002). Neither females with health vulnerability, nor males without health vulnerability, experienced intervention benefits. Adherence-adjusted instrumental variable analysis found intervention effects twice as large. Patterns were similar for MDD but estimates were imprecise due to low prevalence. Conclusions Although some girls benefited, boys and adolescents from families with baseline health problems did not experience mental health benefits from housing mobility policies, and may need additional program supports.

show abstract

Section: Commentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Differential Mental Health Effects of Neighborhood Relocation Among Youth in Vulnerable Families

Osypuk¹,

Tchetgen

Acevedo‐García

et al. 2012

Arch Gen Psychiatry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Common paediatric somatic complaints include headaches, nausea or abdominal pain. Non‐specific causes usually include psychological distress, anxiety, family patterns and life events (Chapman 2005). Somatic complaints may result in a vicious cycle wherein the physical symptoms lead to emotional stress, which further exacerbates the somatic symptoms (Vaalamo et al .…”

Section: Internalizing Disorders and Their Defining Featuresmentioning

confidence: 99%

Childhood internalizing behaviour: analysis and implications

Liu

Chen

Lewis³

2011

Psychiatric Ment Health Nurs

154

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The concept of ‘internalizing behaviour’ reflects a child’s emotional or psychological state and typically includes depressive disorders, anxiety disorders, somatic complaints and teenage suicide. Genetic and environmental causes have been largely implicated, although research continues to explore social etiological factors. Some research suggests females may be especially vulnerable to internalizing disorders, while data across ethnicities are somewhat variable. Regarding treatment, cognitive-behavioural therapies and use of pharmacological approaches (i.e. selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors) have both shown great promise in reducing symptoms of internalizing disorders. However, given the role of the social environment, prevention programmes aimed at reducing exposure to drugs, violence/abuse and environmental toxins are highly important. Internalizing disorders are associated with a host of deleterious outcomes (e.g. school drop-out, substance use and potentially suicide) as well as psychopathological outcomes (e.g. co-morbid anxiety or depression, externalizing disorders – including suicide). Children with mental health problems suffer educationally and are more likely to become entangled in the justice and welfare systems. Clearly, early treatment and prevention programmes for internalizing disorders need to be a priority from a public health perspective as well as from a family and community perspective.

show abstract

“…Six of the eight samples of children in foster care found low rates of somatic complaints, which include problems such as frequent headaches, stomachaches, dizzyness, and fatigue (Achenbach, 1992;Armsden et al, 2000;Clausen et al, 1998;Keller et al, 2001;Zima et al, 2000). Research demonstrates a complex relationship between child somatization and environmental stressors (Chapman, 2005). It could also be that children who are placed in foster care are unlikely to report physical complaints to their caregivers or that the environmental stressors that contribute to somatization are lessened among children who enter foster care.…”

Section: Rates Of Emotional-behavioral Problems Among Childrenmentioning

confidence: 99%

Emotional and Behavioral Problems Reported in Child Welfare Over 3 Years

McCrae

2008

Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Child welfare agencies are required to provide services that ensure that children receive adequate mental health care. This study provides a comprehensive view of the emotional and behavioral problems of children who are referred to child welfare services, using nationally representative data. Bivariate analyses compare rates by child demographics, and conditional probability tables present changes in clinical status. Results show that 62% of children have at least one clinical-level score over 3 years. Rates are highest at baseline. Posttraumatic stress most frequently improves, whereas thought, attention, and aggressive/ delinquent behavior problems are most persistent. Sexualized behavior is more common among White and Hispanic children, and boys are reported with more internalizing problems than do girls. Targeted services are needed for young children who experience posttraumatic stress, as is treatment for attention problems that accounts for both biological and environmental components. Distinguishing the effects of age, environment, and assessment methods on boys' internalizing problems is also critical.

show abstract

Neighborhood quality and somatic complaints among American youth

Cited by 19 publications

References 31 publications

Differential Mental Health Effects of Neighborhood Relocation Among Youth in Vulnerable Families

Differential Mental Health Effects of Neighborhood Relocation Among Youth in Vulnerable Families

Childhood internalizing behaviour: analysis and implications

Emotional and Behavioral Problems Reported in Child Welfare Over 3 Years

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About