SavedAdd your journal

Journals / İstanbul Kuzey Klinikleri / 2021 / Cilt: 8 - Sayı: 3

Relationships between family functioning, parenting and peer victimization in adolescent depression: A cross-sectional study

Aynur Pekcanlar Akay
Merve Onat
Yusuf Ozturk
Caner Mutlu
Gonca Ozyurt
Ali Evren Tufa
Pages
212–221
Publication Date
2022-10-18
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Although cross-sectional design precludes evaluation of causality, it may be prudent to evaluate family functions as well as peer victimization of depressed youth.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:OBJECTIVE: Major depressive disorder (MDD) in adolescence is a prevalent mental health problem with a complex etiology and a rising incidence.
📊
Key Findings & Data:METHODS: The study was designed as a multi-center, cross-sectional, case–control study. 98 adolescents diagnosed with MDD and 99 healthy controls were recruited for the study.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Although cross-sectional design precludes evaluation of causality, it may be prudent to evaluate family functions as well as peer victimization of depressed youth.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Major depressive disorder (MDD) in adolescence is a prevalent mental health problem with a complex etiology and a rising incidence. The aim of the study investigated functioning of family, attitudes of parents, and peer victimization in adolescents with MDD and to compare those with healthy adolescents. METHODS: The study was designed as a multi-center, cross-sectional, case–control study. 98 adolescents diagnosed with MDD and 99 healthy controls were recruited for the study. Beck depression inventory, parental attitude research instrument (PARI) tool, family assessment device (FAD), and multidimensional peer victimization scale (MPVS) were applied to all participants. Descriptive, correlational, and bivariate group comparisons were used in analyses. RESULTS: The average ages of adolescents with MDD and control adolescents were 14.7 (S.D.=1.5) and 15.0 (S.D.=1.6) years, respectively. Females formed 74.5% of youth with MDD (vs. 70.3% of controls). The groups were similar in terms of socio- demographic features (all p>0.05). Adolescents with MDD had significantly elevated scores in FAD subscales except problem solving, PARI rejection of homemaking, marital conflict, and authoritarian subscales, and all MPVS subscales. Adolescents with MDD also displayed significant positive correlations between all MPVS subscales and FAD subscales except FAD problem-solving. CONCLUSION: This cross-sectional, multi-center study suggests that family dysfunction and peer victimization may be higher in youth with MDD. Although cross-sectional design precludes evaluation of causality, it may be prudent to evaluate family functions as well as peer victimization of depressed youth.

🔖

Cite This Article

Akay, A. P., Onat, M., Ozturk, Y., Mutlu, C., Ozyurt, G., Tufa, A. E. (2022). Relationships between family functioning, parenting and peer victimization in adolescent depression: A cross-sectional study. İstanbul Kuzey Klinikleri, Cilt: 8 - Sayı: 3, 212–221. https://ajindex.com/articles/551276

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (14)

  1. Swartz HA, Rollman BL. Managing the global burden of depression: lessons from the developing world. World Psychiatry 2003;2:162–3
  2. American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders. 5th ed. Text Revision. American Psychiatric Association Pres: Washington; 2013
  3. Costello EJ, Mustillo S, Erkanli A, Keeler G, Angold A. Prevalence and development of psychiatric disorders in childhood and adolescence. Arch Gen Psychiatry 2003;60:837–44
  4. Gadow KD, Sprafkin J, Nolan EE. DSM-IVSymptoms in community and clinic preschool children. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry 2001;40:1383–92
  5. Birmaher B, Brent D; AACAP Work Group on Quality Issues, Bernet W, Bukstein O, Walter H, et al. Practice parameter for the assessment and treatment of children and adolescents with depressive disorders. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry 2007;46:1503–26
  6. Menesini E, Nocentini A, Camodeca M. Morality, values, traditional bullying, and cyberbullying in adolescence. Br J Dev Psychol 2013;31:1– 14
  7. Magklara K, Skapinakis P, Gkatsa T, Bellos S, Araya R, Stylianidis S, et al. Bullying behaviour in schools, socioeconomic position and psychiatric morbidity: a cross-sectional study in late adolescents in Greece. Child Adolesc Psychiatry Ment Health 2012;6:8
  8. Olweus D. Understanding and researching bullying: Some critical issues. In: Jimmerson SM, Swearer S. Espelage D, editors. Handbook of bullying in schools: An international perspective. New York, NY: Routledge; 2010. p. 9–34
  9. Hawker DS, Boulton MJ. Twenty years’ research on peer victimization and psychosocial maladjustment: a meta-analytic review of cross-sectional studies. J Child Psychol Psychiatry 2000;41:441–55
  10. Sabuncuoglu O, Ekinci O, Bahadir T, Akyuva Y, Altınöz E, Berkem M. Bullying and its relationship to symptoms of depression in adolescent students. J Clin Psy 2006;9:27–35
  11. Knafl K, Leeman J, Havill N, Crandell J, Sandelowski M. Delimiting family in syntheses of research on childhood chronic conditions and family life. Fam Process 2015;54:173–84
  12. Hughes EK, Gullone E. Internalizing symptoms and disorders in families of adolescents: a review of family systems literature. Clin Psychol Rev 2008;28:92–117
  13. Sander JB, McCarty CA. Youth depression in the family context: familial risk factors and models of treatment. Clin Child Fam Psychol Rev 2005;8:203–19
  14. Guerra NG, Williams KR, Sadek S. Understanding bullying and victimization during childhood and adole