PhD Template



Children’s Behavioral Disorders and Lower Cognitive Development: A Systematic ReviewBy Sonia DonairesB.S. Peru, 1998Thesis Submitted in Partial Fulfillmentof the Requirements for the Master's Degree in Public HealthConcordia UniversityAugust, 2016AbstractChildren’s behavioral disorders and lower cognitive development are problems that impact school performance in elementary schools. The purpose of this systematic review was to identify the internal factors related to issues that arise in schools and the external factors related to problems that happen in an interrelationship between parents, siblings, relatives and friends at home. The seven studies were included in this review three qualitative and four quantitative. The qualities of the studies were evaluated with the Jadad score and the Critical Appraisal Skills Program (CASP). Results showed that problems at home impact tremendously on the incidence of the behavior of children and poor performance in schools. Parenting programs are a successful strategy to support children emotionally and improve behavior. The collaboration between parents, teachers and children is effective intervention with children at school. Further research is needed on the internal factors to related to the issues. Introduction Problem StatementChild behavioral disorders and low cognitive development are problems that impact academic success in elementary schools. The National Research Council and Institute of Medicine reported 10-15 percent of children globally suffer from emotional and behavioral disorders (Kids Mental Health, 2009). According to the Center for Diseases Control and Prevention (CDC) an estimated 13 to 20 percent of US children ages 3-17 (1 out of 5 children) experience behavioral disorders and mental illnesses. The most common child behavioral disorders identified were: Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) 6.8%, behavioral or conduct problems 3.5%, anxiety 3.0%, depression 2.1%, autism spectrum disorders 1.1% and Tourette syndrome 0.2% (CDC, 2015). Medical treatment expenses related to child mental disorders are estimated at $247 billion annually (CDC, 2015). Even though diverse programs and interventions in schools have been implemented, the disruptive behavior of children continues to be a burden not only for parents but also for teachers and communities (CDC, 2015). Children’s lower cognitive development has also been linked to disruptive behavior in the classroom (Losinski, et al., 2014). Most of the time, these children have intervention in schools without any support from parents. Behavior disorders and low cognitive development are issues that can be prevented if they are identified and intervention occurs in early stages of a child’s development (Pre-K children). Purpose StatementChildren’s disruptive behaviors in the classroom are associated with social interaction at home concerning family issues, trauma and sexual abuse (Klansen & Crombag, 2012). Likewise, issues that influence low cognitive development have been linked to children that suffer abuse at schools. Abuse that is a result of bullying, stigmatization, and antisocial behavior that affects the child emotionally and delays cognitive development in schools (Esch, et al., 2014).The purpose of this systematic review was to investigate ways to improve academic performance in schools through implementations of programs based on children’s particular cases. Schools are the right organization in a community to provide an integrative intervention to families of students with disruptive behavior. The ultimate objective is to provide the right intervention for children at early stages of the development that involve an active parent and teacher collaboration to prevent behavior disorders and lower cognitive development.Research Questions and HypothesesOptimum strategies to prevent and treat children’s behavioral disorders and low cognitive development are needed in elementary schools. Alternate Hypothesis: There are external and internal factors that contribute to the behavior and lower academic performance of children with behavioral disorders. This systematic review addressed the following research questions: 1) What are the external and internal factors of behavioral disorders of children that contribute to poor academic achievement in elementary schools? 2) What are the suitable strategies to intervene with students that face behavior disorders? The systematic review analyzes the effectiveness of different behavioral disorders and low cognitive development interventions to change behavior and increase cognitive development of children in elementary schools. Potential Significance Each year five to seven percent of the U.S. children are retained at grade level placed in special education, tiered instruction and intervention in a Response-to-Intervention Model (RTI) categorized as tier 2 and 3 or Rehabilitation Act of 1973 called section 504 in the assumption to help students that are failing academically (Wisconsin Education Association Council WEAC, n.d.). Results show that these measuremes are not effective to intervene students with behavior issues or learning problems (Glickman, 1991). Elementary schools throughout the U.S. have shown poor academic performance because there are several factors that impact student achievement. Those factors are linked to issues with school, home, social relationships, and socio-economic conditions. The potential significance of this systematic review is to make a contribution to the public schools by identifying the external and internal factors that affect children’s behavior and academic performance. Also, to provide possible interventions and recommendations that can further the establishment of better policies and programs in elementary schools.Literature ReviewTheoretical FoundationThe appropriate theories to address child behavior change are the Social Cognitive Theory (SCT) and the Ecological Approach. The SCT was developed from the social learning theories (SLT) of Totter (1954) and Bandura (1977). This theory is a combination of stimulus-response (SR) and cognitive approaches to human behavior. The central point of the SCT refers to a reciprocal interaction of individuals with a set of learning experiences, an environment that examines the external and social context, and behavior that responds to stimulus to reach goals. The SCT works at the interpersonal level and states that a social environment influences individuals (McKenzie, 2013). The primary focus of this research with the SCT is on the component “reinforcement” as an integral part of learning. According to this theory, there are three ways to reinforce positive behavior: directly, vicariously and through self-reinforcement (McKenzie, 2013). These three constructs are crucial to intervene with elementary school aged children to maintain behavior change and further cognitive development. Figure 1 represents the SCT model.Direct Reinforcing is a group that provides verbal feedback every time the participant does good work. Based on child intervention the supportive group is identified as teachers, school administrators, and other people involved in the progress of cognitive development.Vicarious reinforcement consists in the observation of participants (child) of someone being reinforced for behaving appropriately. Self-reinforcement is when a participant keeps a record of their behavior and if there is progress, they reward themselves (McKenzie, 2013). Figure 1: Social Cognitive Theory. Source: Pro-Social Media Effects. (2012). The Ecological Approach is a model that emphasizes: “the linkages and relationships among multiple factors (or determinants) affecting health” (Institute of Medicine, 2003). The target research population is children. Thus, the Ecological Approach has the purpose of involving all the components of the community in benefiting children. This model does not focus on individual problems rather it emphasizes the social and physical environment that involves behavioral disorders. The way that it works ranges from a micro to macro level. Individual – children Interpersonal - family and friend Organizational - Involving organizations and social institutions Community - the relationship between organizersPublic Policy - national state and local laws (McKenzie, 2013). The participation of the community will ensure the maintenance of programs and training to intervene with child behavior disorders and academic success with children in elementary schools. Figure 2 represents the Ecologic Approach model.Figure 2: Bronfenbrenner's Ecological Model. Source: The Psychology Notes HQ. (2016).The two theories utilized by this review are characterized by essential concepts that are appropriate interventions suitable to respond to the research question. The Ecological Approach is a theory that works at the local, state, and national level, which are essential to the maintenance of the program implemented to ensure the success of the intervention. The SCT works on an interpersonal level and focuses on the relationship between students, parents, teachers, and school administrators. The collaboration of leaders of the community is a crucial part of the project to ensure success and improve behavior change and cognitive development once the external and internal factor are disclosed and risk factors are controlled through training and information to parents, children, and teachers. Key Concepts and Variables Children’s behavioral disorders and low cognitive development in elementary schools delay the success of students. According to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ (DHHS) (1999), 20% children and adolescents had a mental disorder from childhood to adolescence. Also, it is estimated that about 10% of people suffer from an emotional disturbance at some point in their life (Brauner & Stephens, 2006). The CDC reported in studies conducted between 2005-2011 that the prevalence of behavior disorders in children ages 3-17 were ADHD 6.8%, behavioral or conduct problems 3.5%, anxiety 3.0%, depression 2.1%, autism spectrum disorders 1.1% and Tourette syndrome 0.2% (CDC, 2015, November 12). Childhood behavior disorders affect not only children, but also, families, and communities. Oliveira, Magalhaes & Salmela (2011) stated that mental health problems are a product of biologic and environmental factors that affect cognitive development in children. Doulames, Lee & Shea (2014) determined that environmental and social interactions are factors that impact behavior in early childhood. The social interaction that a child has with parents, siblings, close relatives, and neighbors at home; as well as teachers, school administrators, paraprofessionals, and tutors at school influence disruptive behavior in the classroom which impacts academic performance (Doulames, Lee & Shea, 2014). The association of child behavior disorders with low cognitive development in elementary schools are affected by external and internal factors that are related to the social interaction of children outside and inside of schools. From the school’s perspective, children suffer a variety of disruptive behaviors while at school. Behavior disorders in children are identified as issues that affect a child’s ability to succeed academically and are linked to early dropouts (Esch, et al, 2014). According to the American Academy of Pediatrics (2004), the most common disruptive behavior disorders that affect cognitive development of children in schools were oppositional defiant disorders (ODD) and conduct disorders (CD). In addition, Bilac, et al. (2014) found an association between classroom issues with aggressiveness and anxiety. In another study by Bilic (2006), some students were affected emotionally or physically as a product of bullying and others were affected by stigmatization and traumatic events occurring in schools. Those students were more dissatisfied with schools. On the other hand, marital conflict, dysfunctional families, and sexual abuse are external factors that were also associated with low academic performance in classroom. Hinnant, et al. (2013) stated that familiar conflicts directly affected children’s attendance, lack of attention, and problem solving. Children’s behavioral disorders are common worldwide; they are exposed to many issues inside and outside of schools that they are unable to control because of the inability to express themselves. In many cases, these are reflected in disruptive conduct that impedes the grasping of and focus on learning. School interventions to remediate low academic progress in children that are affected by behavioral disorders are typically school-based only interventions without parent involvement. Klansen and Crombag (2012) stated that interventions involving parents could improve the academic performance of children with disruptive behaviors. Studies have shown that some behavior disorders in school can be prevented through counseling and treatment, training parents and teachers on how to manage child behaviors, and treatment through pharmacotherapies (Klanse & Crombag, 2012). Studies related to school-based interventions that involve children, parents, and teachers were not found. MethodsThe search engines used for the initial literature review were: Academic Search Premier, PubMed, and Google Scholar. The terms used to search included Boolean phrases as “Children behavior”, “cognitive development”, “low cognitive development”, children’s behavior issues”, “child development”, “Children behavior issues” AND “cognitive development”, “behavior issues” AND “children impact of behavior issues in classroom”.This project employed a systematic review to assess how children’s behavior disorders impact cognitive development in elementary schools. The systematic review examined research conducted on the association of external and internal factors that affect children’s behavior and impede cognitive development. Other scientific studies were selected based on issues related to behavioral disorders and school-based interventions. This study also examined behavioral strategies used to intervene with children with conduct problems that result in poor academic progress in the classroom. Inclusion and exclusion criteriaThe systematic review was limited to studies related to the target population (children ages 4-11) and to external and internal factors that impact children’s behavioral disorders. The examination of the literature review was linked to issues correlated with dysfunctional families and socio-economic status issues at schools. In a effort to find appropriate information to address external and internal factors of disruptive behavior in children, the following inclusion criteria were established: studies that targeted children ages 4 to 11 or Pre-K to 5th grade students, studies with a primarily focus on children’s behavioral and emotional disorders (identified as ADHD, ODD, anxiety disorders, and child depression), Spanish and English languages, and studies conducted from 2000-2016. Exclusion criteria included: poor cognitive development caused by chronic mental illnesses. Therefore, studies related to genetic and biological chronic mental illnesses were excluded. The inclusion and exclusion criteria for this systematic review are depicted in Table 1.Table 1Inclusion/Exclusion CriteriaInclusion Criteria Exclusion CriteriaStudies published from 2000 – 2016Population: Target school aged children < 11 Language: English or Spanish Intervention: School-based programs interventionsOutcome: Poor cognitive development caused by behavioral disorders Behavior issues: children’s behavioral and emotional disorders such as ADHD, ADD, anxiety disorders, and child depression. Conducted prior to 2000Studies on children older than 11Non English or Spanish publicationNon elementary school related Chronic mental illnessesData analysis planThe flow chart in Figure 3 demonstrates the methodology used to select relevant articles reviewed based on the exclusion criteria. The articles chosen for the purpose of the systematic review as shown in Table 1 delineates the parameters of the target population and the issues related children’s behavior. Articles related to chronic mental illnesses were excluded. Through the initial searched 16063 records were identified of which 15937 were excluded on criteria based. This study well identified 126 other studies 119 were excluded based on the criteria. The total of studies included are 7 of which 3 are qualitative studies and 4 quantitative studies. This systematic review analyzed studies chosen based on the target population, risk factors, and interventions. A flow chart representing the sequence of the selection process of studies for this systematic review are in Figure 4.16063 studies identified in initial surveyArticles excluded based on review of titles or abstracts. 15937 Studies included 126 Articles excluded based on unavailability of full text: 107Full text articles for eligibility assessment and Jadad scoring: 19Reasons for exclusion: Chronic mental health disorders:3Different target population: 9Articles included with Jadad score of 3 or higher: 7Articles included with methodology score of qualitative studies of Jadad score of 5 or higher: 3Articles included with methodology score of quantitative studies of 3 or higher: 4Figure 3: Process to Select Studies for Inclusion in the Systematic ReviewResults Factors analyzed for each study in Table 2 show an association between the external and internal factors with the behavior problems of children and poor academic performance in the school. These studies reflect the primary target audience (children) in studies conducted in elementary schools. Also, it identifies the secondary audiences such as teachers and parents that have a close interaction with the children. In addition, in these studies strategic interventions are included related to participation and collaboration of parents and teachers. They are key individuals to take action in the development and implementation of programs to intervene children. The Jadad score was used to compute Randomized Control Trial (RCT) studies, the others studies utilized the methodology score of quantitative research and the Critical Appraisal Skills Program (CASP). The purpose of the checklist of scoring was to ensure the quality of the studies selected. Table 2. Characteristics of Included Quantitative StudiesStudy (Authors name)SettingStudy DesignnPopulationInterventionPrimary OutcomesQuality ScorePaulus, Backes, sander, Weber & Gontard (2014)SchoolPopulation-based study1342Pre-school children 4-7 years712 boys630 girls with anxiety disorders and behavioral inhibitionPrevalence of anxiety disorders and an association with behavioral inhibition 1/4 of 1342 children had clinical signs of an anxiety disorder.MDD/GAD 3.4%SAD 7%PHOB 9.8%SOC 10.7%3Sriskandarajah, Neuner, & Catani, (2015)Schools of Northern Sri LankaCross-sectional study359Primary School children aged 7-11 and their guardiansChildren’s exposure to traumatic events, mental health symptoms, and parenting behaviorParenting violence significant risk factors for the mental health of children 4Wang & Zhou (2015)Three primary schools located in mid-sizes city in northern ChinaCorrelational research119119 couples of 1-childParents’ mental health and family functioning on child’s behavioral problems Parental mental health correlation with child’s behavioral problemsMother no significant Father moderate level5Flores, Supan, Kreutzer, Samson, Coffey, & Javier, (2015)Los Angeles, CaliforniaPilot Randomized Control trial20 Filipino American parentsPrimary caregivers of a child aged 6 to 12 years12-week “Incredible Year” (IY) pilot programIY reduced the incidence of mental health disorders among children3Table 3: Characteristics of Included Qualitative Studies Study (Authors’ name)SettingTheorySamp-ling Procedu-reParticipant Characteri--sticsData Analysis ApproachKey ThemesQuality ScoreLosinski, Zablocki, & Teagarden (2014Where the intervention took place: group or individualMeta-analysis197 Children 7.53 years old from the 16 studies reviewedSelf Regulated Strategy instruction (SRSD) to improve writing Results suggest that SRSD is similarly effective for teaching children and adolescents identified E/BD 5Taylor, Valentine, Sellman, Bransby-Adams, Daley, & Sayal, (2015)12 UK primary schoolsQualitati-ve Systema-tic Review RCT22 parents and 29 teaching staffParents of 4-8 years olds and Teachers ‘1-2-3 Magic’ parenting intervention programParents and teacher stressed the importance of parent/school collaborationThe ‘1-2-3 Magic’- program was favorable by parents.6Hansen Skirbekk, Oerbeck, Wentzel-Larsen, & Kristensen, (2014)Oslo, NorwayCase-Control study102 referrals and 35 controlsChildren aged 7 -13 years with anxiety disorders, ADHD and non-referred controlsDiagnostic for sleep problems and atentional and behavioral deficit hyperactivity disorderSignificant association between sleep problems and intentional functioning for all groups 5Table 4 presents a brief explanation of the results of the selected studies. Also, it is the various studies that depicted or reflected an association between dysfunctional families and children’s behavioral disorders and poor academic progress in elementary schools. Various factors including anxiety and depression disorders in children, family violence were examined in the studies in connection with emotional issues in children with ADHD and ODD, and pilot programs of intervention for parents to improve care and support to improve behavior and grasp of knowledge in the classroom.Table 4. Results of Included StudiesAuthorQuality ScoreInterventionMeasuresResultsSignificancePaulus, Backes, sander, Weber & Gontard (2014)3Prevalence of anxiety disorders and an association with behavioral inhibitionQuestionnaire and checklist: CBCL/4-18DISYPS-II and RIBI Scale3/4 of 1342 children showed clinical signs of anxiety/depression.Yes, high correlation:SAD p <.001PHOB p <.001MMD/GAD p <.001SOC p <.001Sriskandarajah, Neuner, & Catani, (2015)4Children’s exposure to traumatic events, mental health symptoms, and parenting behaviorStrengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ): emotional symptoms, conduct problems, hyperactivity/ina-ttention, peer relationship problems, and prosocial behavior.Family violence 85.5%Children experienced or witnessed 4.5% Reported violence by children:Injury 12.8%Medical treatment 3.1%Violence at home was ongoing 73.8%Yes, correlation of paternal and maternal care p <.001Wang & Zhou (2015)5Parents’ mental health and family functioning on child’s behavioral problemsRCBC measures children’s behavioral problemsFACES-II measures family functioningSAS measure parent’s anxietyCES-D measure parent’s symptoms of depression.Mothers’ anxiety is not significant Fathers’ anxiety reported unfavorable for mother and children.Children’s behavioral problems No, p=.071Yes, p=.002Children p <.01Moderate level of anxietyHansen Skirbekk, Oerbeck, Wentzel-Larsen, & Kristensen, (2014)5Diagnostic for sleep problems and antentional and behavioral deficit hyperactivity disorderK-SADS-PL interview for psychiatric diagnosesCGAS assesses child’s overall severity of disturbanceWASI assesses IQASESBA teacher-rated questionnaireANT assesses alerting, orienting, and executive controlThere is an association between children with anxiety disorders and ADHD, and in non-referred controls with sleep problems and attentional functioningYes, for internalizing problems p =.019No, for externalizing problems p =.249Flores, Supan, Kreutzer, Samson, Coffey, & Javier, (2015)312-week “Incredible Year” (IY) pilot programBenefits and motivation for participationIY reduce the incidence of mental health disorders among childrenYesTaylor, Valentine, Sellman, Bransby-Adams, Daley, & Sayal, (2015)6‘1-2-3 Magic’ parenting intervention programPATCHWORK measures the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a ‘1-2-3 Magic’.The ‘1-2-3 Magic’-based programmer was favorable for parents.Yes, p <.001Losinski, Zablocki, & Teagarden (20145Self Regulated Strategy instruction (SRSD) to improve writingWords writtenQuality of the writing, elements of the writingResults suggest that SRSD is effective for teaching children and adolescents at risk or identified with E/BD.Yes, writing p <. 001essays elements p <. 001 than group designs p=. 011Quality essay highest effect from SRSDp=. 043Word count effect p<. 001 Results of these studies provided evidence that behavior and academic performances are impacted by the external factors. These results showed how children are affected by anxiety, depression, and emotional problems that impede normal learning process in schools. The last two studies Taylor, et al., (2015) and Losinski, et al., (2014) are evidence that developing programs of intervention for parents and teachers can facilitate collaboration to improve not only emotional issues of a child, but also the learning process and parents' support. DiscussionThis systematic review examined the outcomes of studies previously conducted on school-based program interventions. Based on the framework of my proposal, the analyzed studies were used to identify the internal and external factors of children's behavioral disorders and lower cognitive development. The primary outcomes from three studies were that parental issues are risk factors for which children suffer from anxiety disorders, mental health, behavioral problems and there is a significant correlation between family problems and children’s behavior disorders (Sriskandarajah, et al. 2015, Wang & Zhou, 2015, and Hansen, et al. 2014). In multiple studies 85.5% of children were exposed to violence at home had clinical signs of anxiety disorders, and behavioral inhibition that impact their behaviors and learning abilities in the school (Paulus, et al., 2014 and Hansen, et al., 2014). The second research question is supported by studies of Flores, et al., (2015) and Taylor, et al., (2015). These studies reported that interventions in which are involved parents and teacher collaboration might be effective to manage behavior disorders and improve academic performance of a child in the classroom. Studies were limited by the small sample size reflecting the low response rate from parents. Studies examining the effectiveness of 1-2-3 Magic and Incredible Years program found no statistically significance benefit to raising parental awareness of children issues in the school. However, these studies did find collaboration between teachers, parents, and children did aid in children’s improvement in behavior and learning. This result is indicative that parents need to improve their relationships to improve their child disruptive behavior and learning process (Flores, et al. 2015 and Taylor, et al. 2015). Findings of this systematic review identified in relation to external factors that parent’ issues as the primary factors that produce emotional instability in children at elementary schools. Wang & Zhou (2015) showed that the impact of children’s behavioral disorders have statistical significance in regard of issues related to fathers’ anxiety and depression.The effectiveness in relation of better strategies to intervene children was the effectiveness of parenting intervention programs for the acceptance of collaboration between parents and teachers to improve the parent/child relationship. Numerous children in public schools are unable to focus during instruction time because of the diverse problems that affect their behavior and thus school performance. School-based interventions exist but the lack of strategies to obtain parent collaboration is not enough. Limitations of the StudyThe limitations identified in this systematic review are the missing information and limited included studies. The missing information regarding internal factors (inside of school) was not found or needed more time to delve further into the research. Evidence was not found about children’s issues in schools that affect behavior associated with low school performance. This lack of information creates a gap that limits the ability to answer part of the research question. The variety of settings, populations, variables, and study designs found in a previous review of the articles made the selection of the included studies difficult. This systematic review would have better results with more time for investigation and a rigorous selection of the studies to yield results that are closer to obtain real outcomes applicable to the population. The seven studies included in this systematic review is a small number of studies that may influence results.One of the most significant limitations in this systematic review was related to the target population. Some of the included studies were conducted in different settings or countries other than the USA. Even though I have complied with the inclusion criteria of the target population (children ages 4-11 years or children Pre-K to 5th grade in elementary schools), I believe that results of the included studies that were conducted in Northern Sri Lanka, China, Norway and the UK might yield results that can be only applicable to that specific population. Since the review intends to apply outcomes to a United States population, this limitation might become a barrier that can alter the validity of the results. In regard to generalizability, because the target populations found in the included studies are from different cultures (outside of USA), the results of each study cannot be generalized. Also, this barrier might give some discrepancies limiting the applicability of results to the population of the USA. RecommendationsThe contribution of this systematic review to the existing body of knowledge of children’s behavioral disorders and lower academic performance is to acknowledge that children’s behavioral problems in schools are associated with external factors that are related to an interaction with members of the family. The findings can help to improve behavioral programs and also in the selection of better learning strategies to approach students with behavioral disorders. This systematic review should be used to raise awareness among key community leaders and stakeholders. They in turn can work to improve policies that provide better teacher programs and in the design of intervention programs where parents would be involved in the treatment of their children.Based on the results of the study, the recommendations for future research are: First, the limitations of this study can be minimized with additional research to internal factors. This is a meaningful piece that relates to problems that arise inside of the school that might contribute to a poor behavior and academic performance. Second, conduct a more exhaustive investigation of the external factor that impact children’s behavior and the learning process so as to implement better behavior and learning programs to help a child succeed in the school. Third, conduct studies with the appropriate target population in the U.S. This will yield more accurate and reliable outcomes. Finally, future studies are necessary to complement the initial study and to focus more on a child's treatment or intervention in schools.Implications for Social ChangeThe findings of the studies included have determined that environmental and social interactions are factors that impact behavior disorders in a child. Results have shown that the primary problems that affect children inside or outside of the school are related to higher prevalence of anxiety, traumatic events, and problems at home. The application of results to an American population might have some discrepancies because of the different settings or cultures where studies were conducted.The research question concerning suitable strategies to intervene children showed that there are effective programs that can be implemented to treat children with emotional problems and behaviors’ disorders. Implementing trainings for teachers, parents and children at school will be the beginning to develop a intervention programs that involve the target population. ConclusionThe problem of child behavioral disorders and lower cognitive development are issues that impact academic success in elementary schools. It can be prevented if interventions are provided at early ages. The purpose of this systematic review was to identify internal (in schools) and external (at home) factors and find better ways to improve academic performance in schools through implementation of programs based on children’s particular cases. Also, it looks to involve in an active collaboration between parents and teachers to minimize the incidence of children with behavioral disorders and low academic performance. It will, however, take time and a combined effort on the part of key leaders of the community, and state stakeholder to provide better policies and programs in elementary schools. ReferencesAmerican Academy of Pediatrics. (2004). Disruptive behavior disorders. Retrieved from Bennett, K., Rhodes, A. E., Duda, S., Cheung, A. H., Manassis, K., Links, P., … Szatmari, P. (2015). A youth suicide prevention plan for canada: A systematic review of reviews.?Canadian Journal of Psychiatry. Revue Canadienne de Psychiatrie,?60(6), 245–257.problems/Pages/Disruptive-Behavior-Disorders.aspxBelhadj Kouider, E., Koglin, U., & Petermann, F. (2014). Emotional and behavioral problems in migrant children and adolescents in Europe: A systematic review. European Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 23(6), 373391. doi:10.1007/s0078701304858Bilac, O., Ercan, ES., Uysal, T. & Aydin, C. (2014). Prevalence of anxiety and mood disorders and demographic characteristics of elementary school students. Retrieved from , V. (2006). Connection between classroom abuse and manifest aggressiveness, anxiety and altruism. Retrieved from University School of Public Health. (2016, January 6). The social cognitive theory. Retrieved from , A. A., & Khalid, R. (2015). Behavioral problems in children: A systematic review of research literature in Pakistan. Journal Of Behavioural Sciences, 25(2), 8Brauner, C. B., & Stephens, C. B. (2006). Estimating the prevalence of early childhood serious emotional/behavioral disorders: Challenges and recommendations.?Public Health Reports,?121(3), 303–310.Brent DA, Brunwasser SM, Hollon SD, et al. (2015). Effect of a cognitive-behavioral prevention program on depression 6 years after implementation among at- risk adolescents: A randomized clinical trial.?JAMA Psychiatry.?72(11):1110- 1118. doi:10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2015.1559.Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2015, November, 12). Children’s mental health. Retrieved from , G. J., Kern, L., Caskie, G. L., Volpe, R. J., & Gilman, R. (2015). Early intervention for young children with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder: Prediction of academic and behavioral outcomes. School Psychology Review, 44(1), 320.Esch, P. Bocquet, V. Pull, C. Couffignal, S. Lehnert, T. Graas, M., Fond-Harmant, L. & Ansseau, M. (2014). The downward spiral of mental disorders and educational attainment: A systematic review on early school leaving. Retrieved from , N., Supan, J., Kreutzer, C. B., Samson, A., Coffey, D. M., & Javier, J. R. (2015). Prevention of Filipino youth behavioral health disparities: Identifying barriers and facilitators to participating in “Incredible Years,” an evidence-based parenting intervention, Los Angeles, California, 2012.?Preventing Chronic Disease,?12, E178. , B. H., Skirbekk, B., Oerbeck, B., WentzelLarsen, T., & Kristensen, H. (2014). Associations between sleep problems and attentional and behavioral functioning in children with anxiety disorders and ADHD. Behavioral Sleep Medicine, 12(1), 5368. doi:10.1080/15402002.2013.764525Hinnant, B., El-Sheikh, M.m Keiley, M. & Buckhalt, J.A. (2013, December) Marital conflict, allostatic load, and the development of children’s fluid cognitive performance. Society for Research in child development, inc. 0009-3920/2013/8406-0015. DOI: 10.1111/cdev.12103Kids Mental Health. (2009). Children’s behavioral and emotional disorders. Retrieved from , H. & Crombag, AC. (2012, September 9). What works where? A systematic review of child and adolescent mental health interventions for low and middle-income countries. Psychiatry Psychiatric Epidemiology Vol, 48:595-611. DOI 10.1007/s00127-012-0566-xLosinski, M., CuencaCarlino, Y., Zablocki, M., & Teagarden, J. (2014). Examining the efficacy of self regulated strategy development for students with emotional or behavioral disorders: A meta-analysis. Behavioral Disorders, 40(1), 5267Mckenzie, J.F., Neiger, B., & Thackeray, R. (2013). Planning, implementing and evaluating health promotion programs: A primer (5th ed.). San Francisco: PersonsOwens, J., Maxim, R., McGuinn, M., Nobile, C., Msall, M. & Alario, A. (1999). Television-viewing and sleep disturbance in school children. Retrieved from , W., & Ting, Z. (2015). The impact of family functioning and mental health condition on the child’s behavioral problems. Social Behavior & Personality: An International Journal, 43(7), 11351145. doi:10.2224/sbp.2015.43.7.1135Pro-Social Media Effects. (2012, June 4). What is social cognitive theory? and Training Center on Community Living of University of Minnesota. (2011, February). Postsecondary education for students with intellectual and developmental disabilities: A critical review of the state of knowledge and a taxonomy to guide future research. Retrieved from , V., Neuner, F., & Catani, C. (2015). Parental care protects traumatized Sri Lankan children from internalizing behavior problems.?BMC Psychiatry,?15, 203. , J. A., Valentine, A. Z., Sellman, E., Bransby-Adams, K., Daley, D., & Sayal, K. (2015). A qualitative process evaluation of a randomized controlled trial of a parenting intervention in community (school) settings for children at risk of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD).?BMC Psychiatry,?15, 290. Psychology Notes HQ. (2016). What is Bronfembrenner’s ecological systems theory? Retrieved from , B. R., & Lee, D. L. (2015). Effects of oral reading fluency on students with emotional behavioral disorders’ latency to continue reading. Reading Improvement, 52(3), 112125Wisconsin Education Association Council. (n.d). Primer: Education issues –variables affecting student achievement. Retrieved from ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download