Several Asian regions have undergone a dramatic transformation, some becoming very affluent. This paper aims to ascertain how countries that are becoming wealthy have dealt with child and adolescent mental health issues.
OBJECTIVE:
To examine the extent to which clinicians from different cultures agree when rating the quality of a child's family environment and the effect of country, language, and training factors on these ratings.
METHOD:
Eighty-seven health professionals from Malaysia, Spain, Australia, Indonesia, the United States, Denmark, and Singapore rated 7 case vignettes using the Global Family Environment Scale. Half (54%) were psychiatrists. One quarter (26%) performed the ratings after attending a training session, the rest (n = 64, 74%) after reading a training manual.
RESULTS:
Overall, interrater agreement (intraclass r) was 0.84 (95% confidence interval: 0.68-0.96). There were no significant differences in agreement according to country, language, training, or professional group, although there were country differences in the ratings given to 2 vignettes. The majority of raters found the description of the anchor points (86%), training manual (95%), and case vignettes (97%) clear.
CONCLUSIONS:
Clinicians from different cultures seem to be able to make global ratings of the quality of the family environment that are reliable and consistent when using case vignettes. This can be achieved with little training. Global ratings of the quality of the family environment may be a useful tool in mental health research and clinical work.
Objectives: To examine the association between ethnicity, depression, quality of life, and diabetic control in Malaysian adolescents and young adults with type I diabetes mellitus.
Methods: Fifty-two outpatients with type I diabetes (mean age 15.5 years) who attended a Diabetes Clinic were included. The level of HbA1c was the measure of diabetes control used (better control defined as HbA1c < 10%). Other variables were measured through questionnaires (e.g., depressive symptoms, quality of life), computerized diagnostic interviews (major depression), and medical records (e.g., demographic, family circumstances, compliance with treatment).
Results: Ethnic Chinese youth showed better diabetic control than Malays and Indians (mean HbA1c 9.1%, 10.3%, and 11.0% respectively). Young people with better diabetic control (HbA1c < 10%) were more likely to have better quality of life and less likely to live in problematic families. When the cut-off for diabetic control was stricter (HbA1c < or = 8%), the young person's compliance was the main predictor of poor control. Family problems were also associated with poor control but to a lesser extent. The initial association between poorer diabetes control and depression became non-significant when quality of life was taken into account.
Conclusions: There are ethnic differences in juvenile diabetic control in this Malaysian sample which need to be understood further. Previous findings of an association between quality of life and glycemic control were verified but different definitions of good control showed different associations with individual and environmental variables. Clinicians' awareness and early intervention for psychosocial problems (for example, inadequate family support) could improve diabetes control.