UNASSIGNED: This study aimed to investigate the relationship between adolescents\' character strengths and quality of life during the COVID-19 lockdown and to further explore the role of strengths use and perceived threats.
UNASSIGNED: A total of 804 adolescents from Wuhan, China were recruited to complete an online survey. The data collection was conducted between April and May 2020, during the lockdown of Wuhan due to the COVID-19 pandemic, which resulted in the suspension of school attendance for adolescents and the transition to online teaching. Mini Quality of Life Enjoyment and Satisfaction Questionnaire (Mini-Q-LES-Q) was used to measure adolescents\' quality of life, while their character strengths, strengths use, and perceived threats were measured using the Three-Dimensional Inventory of Character Strengths (TICS), the Chinese version Strengths Use Scale (SUS) and Perceived threats of COVID-19 questionnaire.
UNASSIGNED: The results of the study indicated that adolescents\' character strengths could positively affect their quality of life, and strengths use played a partially mediating role, while the moderating effect of perceived threats was not significant.
UNASSIGNED: In the face of persistent pandemic effects or other similar stressful events in the future, the development of adolescents\' character strengths and strengths use can effectively improve adolescents\' quality of life, which provides a theoretical reference for future social work intervention.

BACKGROUND: It is unknown how much variation in adult mental health problems is associated with differences between societal/cultural groups, over and above differences between individuals.
METHODS: To test these relative contributions, a consortium of indigenous researchers collected Adult Self-Report (ASR) ratings from 16 906 18- to 59-year-olds in 28 societies that represented seven culture clusters identified in the Global Leadership and Organizational Behavioral Effectiveness study (e.g. Confucian, Anglo). The ASR is scored on 17 problem scales, plus a personal strengths scale. Hierarchical linear modeling estimated variance accounted for by individual differences (including measurement error), society, and culture cluster. Multi-level analyses of covariance tested age and gender effects.
RESULTS: Across the 17 problem scales, the variance accounted for by individual differences ranged from 80.3% for DSM-oriented anxiety problems to 95.2% for DSM-oriented avoidant personality (mean = 90.7%); by society: 3.2% for DSM-oriented somatic problems to 8.0% for DSM-oriented anxiety problems (mean = 6.3%); and by culture cluster: 0.0% for DSM-oriented avoidant personality to 11.6% for DSM-oriented anxiety problems (mean = 3.0%). For strengths, individual differences accounted for 80.8% of variance, societal differences 10.5%, and cultural differences 8.7%. Age and gender had very small effects.
CONCLUSIONS: Overall, adults\' self-ratings of mental health problems and strengths were associated much more with individual differences than societal/cultural differences, although this varied across scales. These findings support cross-cultural use of standardized measures to assess mental health problems, but urge caution in assessment of personal strengths.

BACKGROUND: Clinicians increasingly serve youths from societal/cultural backgrounds different from their own. This raises questions about how to interpret what such youths report. Rescorla et al. (2019, European Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 28, 1107) found that much more variance in 72,493 parents\' ratings of their offspring\'s mental health problems was accounted for by individual differences than by societal or cultural differences. Although parents\' reports are essential for clinical assessment of their offspring, they reflect parents\' perceptions of the offspring. Consequently, clinical assessment also requires self-reports from the offspring themselves. To test effects of individual differences, society, and culture on youths\' self-ratings of their problems and strengths, we analyzed Youth Self-Report (YSR) scores for 39,849 11-17 year olds in 38 societies.
METHODS: Indigenous researchers obtained YSR self-ratings from population samples of youths in 38 societies representing 10 culture cluster identified in the Global Leadership and Organizational Behavioral Effectiveness study. Hierarchical linear modeling of scores on 17 problem scales and one strengths scale estimated the percent of variance accounted for by individual differences (including measurement error), society, and culture cluster. ANOVAs tested age and gender effects.
RESULTS: Averaged across the 17 problem scales, individual differences accounted for 92.5% of variance, societal differences 6.0%, and cultural differences 1.5%. For strengths, individual differences accounted for 83.4% of variance, societal differences 10.1%, and cultural differences 6.5%. Age and gender had very small effects.
CONCLUSIONS: Like parents\' ratings, youths\' self-ratings of problems were affected much more by individual differences than societal/cultural differences. Most variance in self-rated strengths also reflected individual differences, but societal/cultural effects were larger than for problems, suggesting greater influence of social desirability. The clinical significance of individual differences in youths\' self-reports should thus not be minimized by societal/cultural differences, which-while important-can be taken into account with appropriate norms, as can gender and age differences.

Introduction: The TuberOus SClerosis registry to increase disease Awareness (TOSCA) is an international disease registry designed to provide insights into the clinical characteristics of patients with Tuberous Sclerosis Complex (TSC). The aims of this study were to identify issues that arose during the design, execution, and publication phases of TOSCA, and to reflect on lessons learnt that may guide future registries in rare and complex diseases. Methods: A questionnaire was designed to identify the strengths, weaknesses, and issues that arose at any stage of development and implementation of the TOSCA registry. The questionnaire contained 225 questions distributed in 7 sections (identification of issues during registry planning, during the operation of the registry, during data analysis, during the publication of the results, other issues, assessment of lessons learnt, and additional comments), and was sent by e-mail to 511 people involved in the registry, including 28 members of the Scientific Advisory Board (SAB), 162 principal investigators (PIs), and 321 employees of the sponsor belonging to the medical department or that were clinical research associate (CRA). Questionnaires received within the 2 months from the initial mailing were included in the analysis. Results: A total of 53 (10.4%) questionnaires were received (64.3% for SAB members, 12.3% for PIs and 4.7% for employees of the sponsor), and the overall completeness rate for closed questions was 87.6%. The most common issues identified were the limited duration of the registry (38%) and issues related to handling of missing data (32%). In addition, 25% of the respondents commented that biases might have compromised the validity of the results. More than 80% of the respondents reported that the registry improved the knowledge on the natural history and manifestations of TSC, increased disease awareness and helped to identify relevant information for clinical research in TSC. Conclusions: This analysis shows the importance of registries as a powerful tool to increase disease awareness, to produce real-world evidence, and to generate questions for future research. However, there is a need to implement strategies to ensure patient retention and long-term sustainability of patient registries, to improve data quality, and to reduce biases.

Strengths are positive qualities that significantly contributed to well-being of individuals and community. Therefore, a reliable and valid measure of strengths for research and practice is needed. The Brief Strengths Scale (BSS) is a newly developed tool for measuring the three-dimensional strengths model (i.e., temperance, intellectual, and interpersonal strength). However, empirical support for the measurement invariance of the BSS has not been obtained. This study examined the three-factor structure of BSS across gender, age, education, and marriage groups in a community sample (n = 375) using multi-group confirmatory factor analysis. After removing one item of each subscale from the original version, the revised model provided a good fit to the data at different subgroups. The revised nine-item BSS indicated that measurement invariance across gender and age groups was achieved. In addition, the measurement was more influenced by social-cultural factors than biological factors.