The aim of the current study was to identify predictors of recurrent headache and back pain in young adults (aged 18–27 years) from data assessed in childhood or adolescence, i.e., 9 years before the final survey. Our interest was whether psychological characteristics contribute to the risk of pain prevalence in adult age when controlling for already empirically supported risk factors such as parental pain, pediatric pain and sex. The study was part of a five-wave epidemiological investigation of >5000 families with children aged between 7 and 14 years when addressed first. In a multiple hierarchical regression analysis, the abovementioned three variables (Block-I variables) were entered first followed by five psychological trait variables (Block-II variables: internalizing, anxiety sensitivity, somatosensory amplification, catastrophizing and dysfunctional stress coping) to find out the extent of model improvement. The multivariable hierarchical regression analysis confirmed the hypothesis that the Block-I variables significantly enhance the risk of future pain at young adult age. None of the psychological variables did so. Thus, the hypothesis of a significant surplus predictive effect was not confirmed. The amount of total explained variance differed strongly between headache and back pain. In particular, a valid prediction of back pain was not possible. When analyzed separately in simple regression analysis, psychological variables turned out to be significant predictors, however, of very low effect size. The inclusion of Block-I variables in the model clearly reduced the impact of the psychological variables. This risk profile is discussed in the context of the different trajectories of headache and back pain from childhood to adult age, which were proposed by various studies. We propose that a biopsychological characteristic denoted as emotional negativity, especially regarding self-reference, might be a common factor behind all selected variables. Risk research in recurrent pain is a field where much more multidisciplinary research is needed before progress can be expected.

No abstract

De Richtlijn is gebaseerd op literatuuronderzoek, best practices en ervaringen van de auteurs en heeft een adviserend karakter.Deze Richtlijn dient te zijner tijd te worden herzien op basis van aanvullend onderzoek, ervaringen van gebruikers van de Richtlijn en op basis van bredere ervaring met de implementatie van de herziene opleidingsplannen medisch-specialistische vervolgopleidingen. Naar verwachting zal een eerste herziening-update van de Richtlijn twee jaar na grootschalige implementatie plaatsvinden. InleidingGedurende de opleiding maken artsen in opleiding tot medisch specialist (aios) en hun opleiders gebruik van een portfolio om het leerproces van de aios te volgen, waar nodig bij te sturen en te beoordelen. Toetsresultaten vormen een essentieel onderdeel van de informatie in dit portfolio. De Richtlijn "Interpretatie en gebruik van toetsresultaten in het portfolio" geeft een samenvattend overzicht van aandachtspunten bij interpretatie en gebruik van toetsresultaten in de opleiding tot medisch specialist. Doel van de RichtlijnDe Richtlijn is een hulpmiddel voor aios en opleiders bij de interpretatie en gebruik van toetsresultaten gedurende de opleiding tot medisch specialist en bevat een aantal praktische handvatten en stappenplannen voor het gebruik van de toetsresultaten in begeleidingsgesprekken (voortgangs-en beoordelingsgesprekken). Hierbij wordt niet alleen aandacht besteed aan de functie(s) die toetsresultaten kunnen vervullen bij het opleiden van aios maar ook aan kwaliteitseisen die aan toetsresultaten en toetssystemen gesteld moeten worden ten behoeve van geloofwaardige en verdedigbare besluitvorming. De Richtlijn bevat daarmee informatie die ook voor andere doelgroepen relevant kan zijn: leden van opleidingsteams, opleidingsmanagement, beleidsmakers en medewerkers kwaliteitszorg.Voor aios en opleider (-teams) staan in de Richtlijn de belangrijkste aandachtspunten Richtlijn interpretatie en gebruik van toetsresultaten in het portfolio

Research has shown that high self-esteem (SE) is a core feature of psychological health and well-being. A population sample of German youths (11-16 years, n = 3509) was surveyed in 2 waves regarding SE and various demographic and psychosocial variables assumed to be related. Parents' reports were also gathered about their children. Mean SE-scores indicated a generally high level of SE in the sample. Girls displayed significantly lower SE than boys with an effect size of d = 0.34. Moderate to strong associations were found with satisfaction in different domains of life, with the highest correlation found for appearance and the lowest for health. Girls were in general more dissatisfied with life. Internalizing and also externalizing were negatively correlated with SE, particularly in girls. Also a higher level of somatic symptoms was associated with lower SE. A prospective analysis revealed that dysfunctional parenting and family climate significantly predicted SE explaining more than 20% of variance in SE in girls, but only 10% in boys. Structural social data (e.g. SES) did not impact SE. The study confirmed the significant role of SE for psychological and somatic well-being and the relevance of familial interaction in its formation. The observed gender differences underline the necessity to undertake sex specific analyses in this area of research. Prospective research should be expedited.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: 1.Assess the institutional and individual training needs and gaps in the conduct of human research for PIs at the University of Minnesota.2.Define the training program’s learning objectives.3.Develop and implement an in-person training session that addresses the gaps.METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: Establish a planning committeeIdentify required and optional training that is already available for PIs, then determine gapsUnderstand research training needs based on conversations with departmental and human research protection program leaders.Develop learning objectives and curriculum based on Federal and Local regulations, guidelines, and policies.Establish a feedback loop regarding research compliance with the HRPP, to assess trends and ensure continuous improvement.Evaluate the training program’s participants using confidence and satisfaction measures.RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: Developed and piloted a 90-minute in-person training program entitled “PI Primer” with the goals of: Increasing awareness and knowledge of the role and responsibilities of the Principal Investigator (PIs) according to the International Harmonization for Good Clinical Practice (ICH-GCP), Federal Regulations (FDA, DHHS, ect.), and University of Minnesota Policies.Identifying root causes for receiving an FDA 483 (inspection findings).Addressing and preventing common inspection findings (CAPA).Describe individual and institutional conflict of interest (COI), and identify the key steps necessary to manage COIs.DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT: OHRP’s guidance on the “Responsibilities of Investigators” states that it is the Institution’s responsibility to provide human research training on a wide variety of topics to ensure the ethical conduct of research and protection of participants. PI Primer provides an in-person forum for investigators to build upon required responsible conduct of research and good clinical practice training to be able to apply the role and responsibilities of a PI to their own research. PI Primer also establishes a network of PIs in order to enhance connectivity and shared learning.