Search

Research suggests that breastfeeding may reduce child maltreatment risk. Alaska has high rates of both breastfeeding initiation and maltreatment reports to Child Protective Services (CPS). The present study assessed any and exclusive breastfeeding duration and child maltreatment reports to CPS among Alaskan mother-infant dyads, controlling for demographics and shared risk factors. We used a prospective, population-representative dataset linking 2009-2011 Alaska Pregnancy Risk Assessment Monitoring System (PRAMS) data with 2009-2016 Alaska CPS and administrative state data (n = 3,459). Breastfeeding duration was derived from PRAMS breastfeeding questions and categorized as never, < 1 weeks, 1-9 weeks, and [greater than or equal to] 10 weeks. Age at first report of maltreatment to Alaska CPS included physical or sexual abuse, neglect, or mental injury. Hazard ratios and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated using Cox proportional hazard models, adjusting for confounders. There was no increase in risk of maltreatment report among children never breastfed compared to those breastfed for [greater than or equal to] 10 weeks. Risk of maltreatment report during the observation period was 1.7 times as high among children breastfed for < 1 week (CI: 1.06, 2.73), and 1.5 times as high among those breastfed for 1-9 weeks (CI: 1.17, 1.80), compared to those breastfed for [greater than or equal to] 10 weeks. Estimates were attenuated for exclusive breastfeeding. Feeding method did not predict maltreatment reports in this population. Among mothers who initiated breastfeeding, shorter duration was associated with elevated risk of maltreatment reports. Addressing factors that facilitate or prohibit sustained breastfeeding may reduce risk of child maltreatment reports., Author(s): Helena J. Hutchins [sup.1] , Kim G. Harley [sup.1] , Jordyn T. Wallenborn [sup.1] , Barbara Abrams [sup.1] [sup.2] , Rebecca Reno [sup.1] , Jared W. Parrish [sup.3] Author [...]

The article focuses on the epidemiology of monkeypox in children aged around 12 years during the 2022 outbreak in the United States. Highlighting the transmission routes, the occurrence of cases in neonates and the importance of implementing immediate protective measures for household contacts to prevent transmission to children, emphasizing the need for early diagnosis, infection control and timely implementation of prevention strategies to reduce monkeypox transmission.

Infant and early childhood mental health (IECMH) has been defined as the capacity of infants and young children to regulate their emotions, form secure relationships, and explore their environments. For this special issue, we conducted a review of IECMH outcomes from evaluations of couple‐ and family‐based psychosocial interventions not explicitly designed for trauma exposure published from 2010 through 2019, following Evidence Base Update criteria and the current convention of classifying general categories of intervention approaches rather than the former practice of evaluating specific brand‐name packaged programs. Full‐text review of 695 articles resulted in 39 articles eligible for categorization into intervention approaches, taking into consideration the theoretical orientation of the treatment, the population served, the intervention participants, the target outcomes, the treatment theory of change, and the degree to which the intervention was standardized across participants. Four intervention approaches were identified in this review as Probably Efficacious: Behavioral Interventions to Support Parents of Toddlers, Interventions to Support Adolescent Mothers, Tiered Interventions to Provide Support Based on Assessed Risk, and Home Visiting Interventions to Provide Individualized Support to Parents. Other intervention approaches were classified as Possibly Efficacious, Experimental, or did not have sufficient evidence in this time period to classify under these criteria. Further research could explore how to ensure that all families who need support can receive it, such as by increasing the reach of effective programs and by decreasing the number of families needing additional support. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Young children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) can have challenging behaviors putting them at risk for preschool expulsion and for adverse outcomes across child development, health, and education. We examined the association of preschool expulsion with ADHD symptoms, diagnosis, treatment, and functioning among children with ADHD., Methods: Using the cross-sectional National Survey of the Diagnosis and Treatment of ADHD and Tourette Syndrome on 2947 children aged 5 to 17 years ever diagnosed with ADHD, parents reported on preschool expulsion, ADHD symptoms, diagnosis, treatment, and functioning. Weighted analyses included calculations of estimated means, prevalence, and prevalence ratios., Results: Preschool expulsion was experienced by 4.4% of children ever diagnosed with ADHD (girls: 1.5%; boys: 5.7%). Children with preschool expulsion had lower mean ages at first concern about ADHD symptoms, ADHD diagnosis, and initiation of ADHD medication and had higher prevalence of severe ADHD symptoms and other mental, behavioral, or developmental disorders. A history of preschool expulsion was associated with difficulties with overall school performance, organized activities, writing, handwriting, and the parent-child relationship, but not with math, reading, or peer or sibling relationships. Children with preschool expulsion more often received school supports, behavioral classroom management, peer intervention, and social skills training., Conclusion: Among children ever diagnosed with ADHD, history of preschool expulsion was associated with more severe ADHD symptoms, other disorders, earlier diagnosis and medication initiation, and academic and social impairment. Health care providers can use preschool expulsion as an indicator of risk for children with ADHD and connect families to effective treatments., Competing Interests: The authors declare no conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2024 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Competing Interests: All authors have completed and submitted the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors form for disclosure of potential conflicts of interest. Stephen L. White reports travel support from the Association of Public Health Laboratories to attend the April 2023 committee meeting, travel support from the Council of State and Territorial Epidemiologists for attendance at the Advanced Molecular Detection workshop and the 2023 annual meeting, and uncompensated participation as the Vice Chair of the Association of Public Health Laboratories Global Health Committee. No other potential conflicts of interest were disclosed.

CDC recommends a number of mitigation behaviors to prevent the spread of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Those behaviors include 1) covering the nose and mouth with a mask to protect others from possible infection when in public settings and when around persons who live outside of one's household or around ill household members; 2) maintaining at least 6 feet (2 meters) of distance from persons who live outside one's household, and keeping oneself distant from persons who are ill; and 3) washing hands often with soap and water for at least 20 seconds, or, if soap and water are not available, using hand sanitizer containing at least 60% alcohol (1). Age has been positively associated with mask use (2), although less is known about other recommended mitigation behaviors. Monitoring mitigation behaviors over the course of the pandemic can inform targeted communication and behavior modification strategies to slow the spread of COVID-19. The Data Foundation COVID Impact Survey collected nationally representative data on reported mitigation behaviors during April-June 2020 among adults in the United States aged ≥18 years (3). Reported use of face masks increased from 78% in April, to 83% in May, and reached 89% in June; however, other reported mitigation behaviors (e.g., hand washing, social distancing, and avoiding public or crowded places) declined marginally or remained unchanged. At each time point, the prevalence of reported mitigation behaviors was lowest among younger adults (aged 18-29 years) and highest among older adults (aged ≥60 years). Lower engagement in mitigation behaviors among younger adults might be one reason for the increased incidence of confirmed COVID-19 cases in this group, which have been shown to precede increases among those >60 years (4). These findings underscore the need to prioritize clear, targeted messaging and behavior modification interventions, especially for young adults, to encourage uptake and support maintenance of recommended mitigation behaviors to prevent the spread of COVID-19., Competing Interests: All authors have completed and submitted the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors form for disclosure of potential conflicts of interest. Joseph Willey reports grants from the David and Louise Packard Foundation and the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation (both partial funders of the COVID Impact Survey) during the conduct of the study. No other potential conflicts of interest were disclosed.