Assessment of Youth Coping and Appraisals Through a Timelining Activity: Validation and Utility of a Tool for Pediatric Research and Practice.
Wendy S Looman, Donna Eull, Elena Geiger-Simpson and 4 others
PMID 36890039WHAT IT FOUND
Youth ages 8-17 completed a brief coping timeline in about 7.3 minutes and rated it easy.
Their confidence in changing or tolerating stressors lined up with well-being and depression, but one coping measure did not work well.
Key findings
01Of 272 youth initially enrolled, 231 had complete data; the timeline and interview averaged 7.3 minutes, and participants rated the drawing 3.3 on a 1 to 10 ease scale (1 really easy, 10 really hard).
02Youth who believed they could both change a stressor and handle it if it could not change had the highest subjective well-being and lowest depression scores; those low on both had the opposite pattern.
03The accommodative coping measure had internal consistency alpha .45, did not differ significantly by appraisal group, and was not significant in the outcome model.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for RNs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
The data were collected at one time point, so the study cannot show that appraisals, coping or the timeline caused better well-being or fewer depression symptoms. Participants were recruited from state and county fairs in one Midwestern state, and the sample was somewhat homogeneous, so results may not apply to all youth in the United States. The fair setting was informal, which may have made it harder for some youth to engage fully with the activity. Some youth did not complete the full protocol, and those who skipped the interview tended to be younger, so the analysed sample may not represent all fair attendees. The accommodative coping scale had low internal consistency and did not behave as expected, so conclusions about that coping style are weak. The study tested only coping appraisals and strategies, not the wider resilience portfolio factors such as supportive relationships, meaning-making and future orientation. The paper did not test whether using the timeline improves clinical care, patient outcomes or treatment engagement.
Declared interests
No author conflict-of-interest or funding statement is included in the supplied article text; the publication types list Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural.
The easy way to misread this
Do not read the timeline as an intervention that improves coping or well-being. This was a cross-sectional validation and feasibility study, not a treatment trial.