Pregnant women constitute a vulnerable population, with 25.3% of pregnant women classified as suffering from a psychiatric disorder. Since childbearing age typically aligns with the onset of mental health disorders, it is of utmost importance to consider the effects that antipsychotic drugs have on pregnant women and their developing fetus. However, the induction of pharmacological treatment during pregnancy may pose significant risks to the developing fetus. Antipsychotics are typically introduced when the nonpharmacologic approaches fail to produce desired effects or when the risks outweigh the benefits from continuing without treatment or the risks from exposing the fetus to medication. Early studies of pregnant women with schizophrenia showed an increase in perinatal malformations and deaths among their newborns. Similar to schizophrenia, women with bipolar disorder have an increased risk of relapse in antepartum and postpartum periods. It is known that antipsychotic medications can readily cross the placenta, and exposure to antipsychotic medication during pregnancy is associated with potential teratogenicity. Potential risks associated with antipsychotic use in pregnant women include congenital abnormalities, preterm birth, and metabolic disturbance, which could potentially lead to abnormal fetal growth. The complex decision-making process for treating psychosis in pregnant women must evaluate the risks and benefits of antipsychotic drugs.

No abstract

Stimulants are effective in treating attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Psychiatrist Charles Bradley first made this discovery in 1937 when he found that children treated with amphetamines showed improvements in school performance and behavior. Between 1995 and 2008, stimulants to treat ADHD increased six-fold among American adults and adolescents at an annual rate of 6.5%. Stimulants without a prescription, known as nonmedical use or misuse, have also increased. The highest rates of nonmedical prescription drug misuse in the United States are seen most notably in young adults between 18 and 25 years, based on data from the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration in 2021. Aside from undergraduate students, nonmedical prescription stimulant use is prevalent among medical students worldwide. A recent literature review reported the utilization of stimulants without a prescription in 970 out of 11,029 medical students. The percentages of medical students across the country misusing stimulants varied from 5.2% to 47.4%. Academic enhancement, reported in 50% to 89% of college students with stimulant misuse, is the most common reason for nonmedical stimulant use. With the increasing use of stimulants among adolescents and adults, it is unclear what long-term outcomes will be since little data are available that describe differences in how side effects are experienced for prescribed and non-prescribed users. The present narrative review focuses on these adverse effects in this population and the reasonings behind misuse and nonmedical use.

Coaching styles can have a profound impact on the psychological health of young athletes. Negative coaching styles may reinforce negative traits that encourage the development of so-called "hazardous attitudes" in players of youth sports. The effects of negative parenting behaviors are predictable, and when a youth coach imposes such behaviors onto the team atmosphere, the impact on the thoughts, feelings, and behaviors of individual players can be observed. Children coached in such a paradigm may feel unsafe in the team setting. Alternatively, attachment theory posits that children who do feel safe are in a more optimal condition for exploration and learning. Both parenting and coaching styles range from firm to unstructured and from critical to positive. The intersections of these characteristics create a dimensional model that explains overarching parenting and coaching styles. Research suggests that the firm-positive parenting model is preferred to create an optimal atmosphere, where children become optimistic and motivated. The purpose of this paper is to explore the theory behind the impact that various styles have on the individual youth athlete as well as the team. Additionally, the authors illustrate a model of understanding the parenting and coaching style combinations, including key characteristics and examples that can help to identify these styles.

No abstract