Editorial

This issue of the Journal contains three interesting articlesabout central aspects of public opinion research, as well asan equal number of research notes that reflect the range oftopics that interest all public opinion researchers. Toshio Takeshita takes a turn at reconceptualizing agenda-settingstudies, using a taxonomy     

Access to human,animal, and environmental journals is still limited for the One Health community

Objective

“One Health” is an interdisciplinary approach to evaluating and managing the health and well-being of humans, animals, and the environments they share that relies on knowledge from the domains of human health, animal health, and the environmental sciences. The authors'' objective was to evaluate the extent of open access (OA) to journal articles in a sample of literature from these domains. We hypothesized that OA to articles in human health or environmental journals was greater than access to animal health literature.

Methods

A One Health seminar series provided fifteen topics. One librarian translated each topic into a search strategy and searched four databases for articles from 2011 to 2012. Two independent investigators assigned each article to human health, the environment, animal health, all, other, or combined categories. Article and journal-level OA were determined. Each journal was also assigned a subject category and its indexing evaluated.

Results

Searches retrieved 2,651 unique articles from 1,138 journals; 1,919 (72%) articles came from 406 journals that contributed more than 1 article. Seventy-seven (7%) journals dealt with all 3 One Health domains; the remaining journals represented human health 487 (43%), environment 172 (15%), animal health 141 (12%), and other/combined categories 261 (23%). The proportion of OA journals in animal health (40%) differed significantly from journals categorized as human (28%), environment (28%), and more than 1 category (29%). The proportion of OA for articles by subject categories ranged from 25%–34%; only the difference between human (34%) and environment (25%) was significant.

Conclusions

OA to human health literature is more comparable to animal health than hypothesized. Environmental journals had less OA than anticipated.Keywords (Medical Subject Headings) Publishing, Periodicals as Topic, Access to Information, Veterinary Medicine, Environment, Environmental Health, Medicine“One Health” is an integrated, transdisciplinary approach to solve complex problems at the diverse interfaces shared by humans, animals, and the environment [1]. The One Health approach to evaluating and managing the health and well-being of humans, animals, and the environments that they share relies on knowledge from the domains of human health, animal health, and the environmental sciences. Although there is a growing body of literature about the development of the One Health concept as documented by Pepper, Carrigan, Shurtz, and Foster [2], this literature is not the same as the combination of literature from the three domains that is applied in service of One Health. Every discipline related to One Health has its unique mindset and language, with corresponding lists of acronyms that are frequently an impediment to effective communication across the participating professions. Relevant papers guiding a One Health approach may never specifically use “One Health” as a term or concept.To promote better communication and collaboration among health professionals and environmental scientists, a public monthly One Health Intellectual Exchange Group (IEG) hosted by the North Carolina Biotechnology Center was launched in 2009. In 2011, faculty from the North Carolina State University College of Veterinary Medicine, University of North Carolina''s Gillings School for Global Public Health, Duke Global Health Institute, and Nicholas School of the Environment at Duke University expanded the IEG series into a weekly seminar course with eight One Health focus areas [3]. The eight focus area modules were the following: an introduction to One Health; environmental health and ecology; the human and animal bond; zoonoses and emerging infectious diseases; food and water safety; disease surveillance, informatics, and disaster preparedness; benefits of comparative medicine; and policy and education (Appendix A, online only). Each seminar speaker recommended papers to read prior to the session to provide a foundation for the topic because student backgrounds and majors were quite diverse. Represented student majors included master''s of public health, master''s of animal science, doctor of veterinary medicine, graduate-level environmental sciences, and undergraduate-level biochemistry, engineering, and biology.Open access (OA) to relevant literature is very important to scholars and practitioners working on interdisciplinary problems. The One Health Proof of Concept Workgroup found that few studies assess outcomes in human, animal, and environmental spheres simultaneously [4], making it important to be able to access articles from each of the three domains to get a more complete picture.The objective of this study was to evaluate the extent of OA to journal articles in a sample of literature relevant to One Health from the human, animal, and environmental domains. Working in a college of veterinary medicine and supporting faculty, staff, and students addressing interdisciplinary problems under the One Health umbrella [5], the authors were familiar with the extent of OA in human biomedical and public health literature and the literature of veterinary medicine but were less familiar with environmental journals. In light of general availability of environmental information and OA to publications such as Environmental Health Perspectives, we thought it likely that environmental literature would be relatively open compared to the other subject areas. Therefore, we hypothesized OA to articles from human health or environmental journals was greater than access to animal health literature. We chose to look at article-level subject categorization and access, as well as journal-level categorization and access, because they might differ. Article-level access relates more to authors'' decisions about OA for a content domain, while journal-level access and subject categorization are driven by publishers and associations. Understanding the distinction and having data would inform our efforts to promote increased OA to this literature.     

Predictors and outcomes of low-income fathers’ reading with their toddlers

Most studies of parent–child bookreading have focused on mothers reading to their children. Though the role of fathers in children's lives is widely emphasized, we know almost nothing about father–child bookreading, particularly among low-income families. The present study was designed to examine how often low-income fathers report reading to their children and what the predictors and effects of paternal bookreading are. The fathers in this study were participants in the national evaluation of Early Head Start (EHS) and were recruited via mothers enrolled in the EHS study. Participating fathers were interviewed at home and their children's cognitive and language development were assessed using standardized measures from ages 2 to 5. Results demonstrated a wide variety in frequency of bookreading among fathers. Fathers were more likely to read to their children frequently if they spoke English at home, if they had a high school education, and if their children had better language skills. Fathers’ bookreading predicted children's cognitive outcome. Paternal bookreading did predict children's language outcomes but only for children whose fathers had at least a high school education.     

Functional reading difficulties in Denmark

In this first Danish study of adult reading skills, 1124 adults between 18 and 67 years of age participated in an interview about reading habits and skills, and 445 were tested individually at home using six common texts. Great care was taken to ascertain that subjects were representative of the whole adult population and that the texts covered most types of everyday reading. Three percent of the participants were found to have severe functional reading difficulties and a further 9 percent to have moderate difficulties. Regression analyses found several unique predictors of reading difficulties: age (adults over 45 years reading more poorly than younger adults), limited basic education, no vocational training nor higher education, and a small amount of reading needed at work. The rate of poor readers was about four times higher among persons with low income than among others. Men and women read equally well although men tended to rate themselves lower as readers than women did. Methodological issues and some educational implications are discussed.     

Seeing the Forest and the Trees: Comparison of Two IRTree Models to Investigate the Impact of Full Versus Endpoint-Only Response Option Labeling

In this study, we examined the results and interpretations produced from two different IRTree models—one using paths consisting of only dichotomous decisions, and one using paths consisting of both dichotomous and polytomous decisions. We used data from two versions of an impulsivity measure. In the first version, all the response options had labels; in the second version, only the endpoints were labeled. Based on past research, we hypothesized that the endpoints would be selected more frequently in the endpoint-only labeled condition, and the midpoint response option would be selected more frequently in the fully labeled condition. Results from the two models (dichotomous and polytomous) were similar and indicated that our hypotheses were partially supported—specifically, there was no consistent pattern in terms of which condition saw a higher frequency of midpoint response selection. However, our hypotheses regarding extreme responding in the endpoint-only labeling condition were supported.     

Stress in Families of Young Children with Down Syndrome, Williams Syndrome, and Smith-Magenis Syndrome

This study examined whether stress levels differ in families of young children with three different genetic etiologies of mental retardation, and whether child characteristics associated with those genetic etiologies may help explain these differences. Participants were sixty families of young children with Down syndrome, Williams syndrome, and Smith-Magenis syndrome. All children were between the ages of 3 and 10 years. Parents completed Achenbach's Child Behavior Checklist, the Questionnaire on Resources and Stress-Friedrich edition, and a demographic questionnaire. Families of children with Down syndrome experienced significantly less Pessimism than the other two etiology groups and significantly less Parent and Family Problems than families of children with Smith-Magenis syndrome. The strongest predictor of Parent and Family Problems was maladaptive behavior in Smith-Magenis syndrome, younger age in Down syndrome, and both maladaptive behavior and younger age in Williams syndrome. Maladaptive behavior predicted Pessimism in families of children with Smith-Magenis syndrome, but none of the variables examined significantly predicted Pessimism in the other two syndromes. The importance of behavioral phenotype research is discussed for practitioners working with young children with mental retardation and their families.     

Neurobehavioral and Psychosocial Issues in Klinefelter Syndrome

Klinefelter Syndrome (KS) is a relatively common (1/500 to 1/1,000) genetic syndrome caused by an extra X chromosome in males, leading to an XXY karyotype. In most cases, the physical and neurobehavioral characteristics of KS are relatively mild, and KS is not usually associated with moderate or severe mental retardation. However, KS is often associated with significant language‐based learning disabilities and executive dysfunction, making it a plausible genetic model for understanding the neurobiology of these areas of cognition that are so fundamental to learning in a classroom. Additionally, the psychosocial aspects of KS, which can have a significant impact on school performance and learning, have been explored only on an anecdotal level. We have conducted pilot studies in a small group of KS adolescents and adults to begin to identify the social, emotional, and adaptive behavior issues facing KS subjects and have identified several areas for further research. This includes characterization of mild maladaptive behaviors, as well as significant strengths in other areas. Further work is needed to determine how the social‐emotional and cognitive features of the disorder interact or change over the lifetime of subjects and how the learning disabilities respond to hormonal or cognitive‐based therapy.     

Motor and coordination difficulties in children with emotional and behavioural difficulties

To date, very few studies have explored the incidence of motor impairment amongst children with social, emotional and behavioural difficulties (social, emotional and mental health (SEMH); formerly SEBD in England). Following research that suggests an increase in motor difficulties in young children and adolescents with SEMH difficulties, this study compares profiles of motor ability using the Movement ABC-2 assessment in children attending a specialist SEMH primary school with a typically developing comparison group and children with a diagnosis of developmental coordination disorder. We report an increased prevalence of borderline or clinically significant motor impairment amongst children with SEMH difficulties compared to the comparison group, with 44% of the SEMH special school sample falling within these ranges. We suggest that bearing in mind the increased likelihood for motor impairment is important in SEMH education, as it has likely impact on classroom functioning and ability and motivation to take part in socially and academically relevant activities.