The SDMPH 10-year anniversary conference created an opportunity for a researcher to present at a professional association conference to advance their research by seeking consensus of statements using Delphi methodology.

Conference attendees and SDMPH members who did not attend the conference were identified as Delphi experts. Experts rated their agreement of each statement on a 7- point linear numeric scale. Consensus amongst experts was defined as a standard deviation < = 1. Presenters submitted statements relevant to advancing their research to the authors to edit to fit Delphi statement formatting.

Statements attaining consensus were included in the final report after the first round. Those not attaining consensus moved to the second round in which experts were shown the mean response of the expert panel and their own response for opportunity to reconsider their rating for that round. If reconsideration attained consensus, these statements were included in the final report. This process repeated in a third and final round.

37 Experts agreed to participate in the first round; 35 completed the second round, and 34 completed the third round; 35 statements attained consensus; 3 statements did not attain consensus.

A Delphi technique was used to establish expert consensus of statements submitted by the SDMPH conference presenters to guide their future education, research, and training.

Despite the array of neuropsychological tests available, these assessments are largely made and developed for use in WEIRD (western, educated, industrialized, rich, democratic) societies (Fernandez, 2019; Ponsford, 2017). The Multicultural Neuropsychological Scale (MUNS) was developed with underrepresented groups in mind as a universally valid neuropsychological assessment which can be used across cultures and adapted to different languages. To assist with the validation of the MUNS as a cross-cultural instrument, investigators administered the MUNS to a cognitively 'healthy’ college-aged population in the United States as a means of collecting normative data. Results were compared to samples taken from an Argentine university, Universidad Catelica de Cerdoba, and combined with another American university, Marymount Loyola University. The goal of this comparison was to provide evidence supporting the validity of the MUNS as a universal, cross-cultural neuropsychological assessment battery.

Students from James Madison University (JMU) in Harrisonburg, Virginia (N = 24, Age = 20.083 1.93, Female = 87.5%) were recruited via a campus-wide email. Students who met inclusionary criteria were selected for MUNS administration. Students completed a background questionnaire and effort measure (REY-15; Rey, 1964) before completing the MUNS battery, consisting of eight subtests with four delayed trials. Descriptive statistics of the group were assessed, and one-way ANOVAs were conducted on the various subtests to determine whether differences exist between the American and Argentine samples.

No significant difference between groups was found for seven subtests. A difference existed on the Attention subtest between the American (f (1, 106) = 45.409, p < .001).

The results show support for the cross-cultural validity of the MUNS. The only significant difference was found in the Arrows (Old) subtest. This is in alignment with previous administrations of the MUNS (Fernandez et al., 2018). Further studies are needed to assess potential bias within this subtest, as well as to pursue comparison studies for the New Arrows subtest administered within this USA sample. The present findings provide further evidence that the MUNS can be applied as a neuropsychological assessment across a variety of populations.

Radiotherapy for pediatric brain tumor has been associated with late cognitive effects. Compared to conventional photon radiotherapy (XRT), proton radiotherapy (PRT) delivers less radiation to healthy brain tissue. PRT has been associated with improved long term cognitive outcomes compared to XRT. However, there is limited research comparing the effects of XRT and PRT on verbal memory outcomes.

Survivors of pediatric brain tumor treated with either XRT (n = 29) or PRT (n = 51) completed neuropsychological testing > 1 year following radiotherapy. XRT and PRT groups were similar with respect to sex, handedness, race, age at diagnosis, age at evaluation, tumor characteristics, and treatment history (i.e., craniospinal irradiation, craniotomy, shunting, chemotherapy, radiation dose). Verbal learning and memory were assessed using the age-appropriate version of the California Verbal Learning Test (CVLT-II/CVLT-C). Measures of intellectual functioning, executive functioning, attention and adaptive behavior were also collected. Performance on neuropsychological measures was compared between treatment groups (XRT vs. PRT) using analysis of covariance (ANCOVA). On the CVLT, each participant was classified as having an encoding deficit profile (i.e., impaired learning, recall, and recognition), retrieval deficit profile (i.e., impaired recall but intact recognition), intact profile, or other profile. Chi-squared tests of independence were used to compare the probability of each memory profile between treatment groups. Pearson correlation was used to examine associations between memory performance and strategy use, intellectual functioning, adaptive behavior, attention, and executive functioning.

Overall, patients receiving PRT demonstrated superior verbal learning (CVLT Trials 1-5; t(76) = 2.61, p = .011), recall (CVLT Long Delay Free; t(76) = 3.57, p = .001) and strategy use (CVLT Semantic Clustering; t(76) = 2.29, p = .025) compared to those treated with XRT. Intact performance was more likely in the PRT group than the XRT group (71% PRT, 38% XRT; X2 = 8.14, p = .004). Encoding and retrieval deficits were both more common in the XRT group, with encoding problems being most prevalent (Encoding Deficits: 31% XRT, 12% PRT, X2 = 4.51, p = .034; Retrieval Deficits: 17% XRT, 4% PRT, X2 = 4.11, p = .043). Across all participants, semantic clustering predicted better encoding (r = .28, p = .011) and retrieval (r = .26, p = .022). Better encoding predicted higher intellectual (r = .56, p < .001) and adaptive functioning (r = .30, p = .011), and fewer parent-reported concerns about day-today attention (r = -.36, p = .002), and cognitive regulation (r = -.35, p = .002).

Results suggest that PRT is associated with superior verbal memory outcomes compared to XRT, which may be driven by encoding skills and use of learning strategies. Moreover, encoding ability predicted general intellectual ability and day-to-day functioning. Future work may help to clarify underlying neural mechanisms associated with verbal memory decline following radiotherapy, which will better inform treatment approaches for survivors of pediatric brain tumor.

Significant advances in the research of sport-related concussion (SRC) and repetitive head impacts (RHI) over the previous decade have translated to improved injury identification, diagnosis, and management. However, an objective gold standard for SRC/RHI treatment has remained elusive. SRC often result in heterogenous clinical outcomes, and the accumulation of RHI over time is associated with long-term declines in neurocognitive functioning. Medical management typically entails an amalgamation of outpatient medical treatment and psychiatric and/or behavioral interventions for specific symptoms rather than treatment of the underlying functional and/or structural brain injury. Transcranial photobiomodulation (tPBM), a form of light therapy, has been proposed as a non-invasive treatment for individuals with traumatic brain injuries (TBI), possibly including SRC/RHI. With the present proof-of-concept pilot study, we sought to address important gaps in the neurorehabilitation of former athletes with a history of SRC and RHI by examining the effects of tPBM on neurocognitive functioning.

The current study included 49 participants (45 male) with a history of SRC and/or RHI. Study inclusion criteria included: age 18-65 years and a self-reported history of SRC and/or RHI. Exclusion criteria included: a history of neurologic disease a history of psychiatric disorder, and MRI contraindication. We utilized a non-randomized proof-of-concept design of active treatment over the course of 8-10 weeks, and neurocognitive functioning was assessed at pre- and post-treatment. A Vielight Neuro Gamma at-home brain tPBM device was distributed to each participant following baseline assessment.

Participants completed standardized measures of neurocognitive functioning, including the California Verbal Learning Test (CVLT-3), Delis Kaplan Executive Function System (D-KEFS), Continuous Performance Test (CPT-3), and The NIH Toolbox Cognition Battery. Neurocognitive assessments were collected prior to and following tPBM treatment. Paired t-tests and Wilcoxon’s signed-rank tests were used to evaluate change in performance on measures of neurocognitive functioning for normal and nonnormal variables, respectively, and estimates of effect size were obtained.

Study participants’ ability for adapting to novel stimuli and task requirements (i.e., fluid cognition; t=5.96; p<.001; d=.90), verbal learning/encoding (t=3.20; p=.003; d=.48) and delayed recall (z=3.32; p=.002; d=.50), processing speed (t=3.13; p=.003; d=.47), sustained attention (t=-4.39; p<.001; d=-.71), working memory (t=3.61; p=.001; d=.54), and aspects of executive functioning improved significantly following tPBM treatment. No significant improvements in phonemic and semantic verbal fluencies, reading ability, and vocabulary were shown following tPBM treatment.

The results of this pilot study demonstrate that following 8-10 weeks of active tPBM treatment, retired athletes with a history of SRC and/or RHI experienced significant improvements in fluid cognition, learning and memory, processing speed, attention, working memory, and aspects of executive functioning. Importantly, the majority of effect sizes ranged from moderate to large, suggesting that tPBM has clinically meaningful improvements on neurocognitive functioning across various cognitive domains. These results offer support for future research employing more rigorous study designs on the potential neurorehabilitative effects of tPBM in athletes with SRC/RHI.

1. (1) To recognise and understand the development of PTSD following childbirth and baby loss.

2. (2) To understand how Ehlers and Clark’s (2000) cognitive model of PTSD can be applied to post-partum PTSD.

3. (3) To be able to apply cognitive therapy for PTSD to patients with perinatal PTSD, including traumatic baby loss through miscarriage or birth.

4. (4) To discover common personal meanings associated with birth trauma and baby loss and the steps to update them.

1. (1) To recognise persistent negative self-evaluations as a key feature of SAD.

2. (2) To understand that persistent negative self-evaluations are central in the Clark and Wells (1995) cognitive model and how to formulate these as part of SAD.

3. (3) To be able to use all the experiential interventions in cognitive therapy for SAD to address these beliefs.

After reading this article, it is hoped that readers will be able to:

1. (1) Conceptualise why surveys can be useful in cognitive behavioural therapy.

2. (2) Implement collaborative and individualised survey design, delivery and feedback as part of a CBT intervention.

1. (1) To recognise common misconceptions about trauma-focused CBT for PTSD and the evidence against them.

2. (2) To widen understanding of the application of cognitive therapy for PTSD (CT-PTSD) to a broad range of presentations.

3. (3) To increase confidence in the formulation-driven, flexible, active and creative delivery of CT-PTSD.

Cognitive therapy for social anxiety disorder (CT-SAD) is recommended by NICE (2013) as a first-line intervention. Take up in routine services is limited by the need for up to 14 ninety-min face-to-face sessions, some of which are out of the office. An internet-based version of the treatment (iCT-SAD) with remote therapist support may achieve similar outcomes with less therapist time.

102 patients with social anxiety disorder were randomised to iCT-SAD, CT-SAD, or waitlist (WAIT) control, each for 14 weeks. WAIT patients were randomised to the treatments after wait. Assessments were at pre-treatment/wait, midtreatment/wait, posttreatment/wait, and follow-ups 3 & 12 months after treatment. The pre-registered (ISRCTN 95 458 747) primary outcome was the social anxiety disorder composite, which combines 6 independent assessor and patient self-report scales of social anxiety. Secondary outcomes included disability, general anxiety, depression and a behaviour test.

CT-SAD and iCT-SAD were both superior to WAIT on all measures. iCT-SAD did not differ from CT-SAD on the primary outcome at post-treatment or follow-up. Total therapist time in iCT-SAD was 6.45 h. CT-SAD required 15.8 h for the same reduction in social anxiety. Mediation analysis indicated that change in process variables specified in cognitive models accounted for 60% of the improvements associated with either treatment. Unlike the primary outcome, there was a significant but small difference in favour of CT-SAD on the behaviour test.

When compared to conventional face-to-face therapy, iCT-SAD can more than double the amount of symptom change associated with each therapist hour.

Evidence-based treatment for panic disorder consists of disorder-specific cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) protocols. However, most measures of CBT competence are generic and there is a clear need for disorder-specific assessment measures.

To fill this gap, we evaluated the psychometric properties of the Cognitive Therapy Competence Scale (CTCP) for panic disorder.

CBT trainees (n = 60) submitted audio recordings of CBT for panic disorder that were scored on a generic competence measure, the Cognitive Therapy Scale – Revised (CTS-R), and the CTCP by markers with experience in CBT practice and evaluation. Trainees also provided pre- to post-treatment clinical outcomes on disorder-specific patient report measures for cases corresponding to their therapy recordings.

The CTCP exhibited strong internal consistency (α = .79–.91) and inter-rater reliability (ICC = .70–.88). The measure demonstrated convergent validity with the CTS-R (r = .40–.54), although investigation into competence classification indicated that the CTCP may be more sensitive at detecting competence for panic disorder-specific CBT skills. Notably, the CTCP demonstrated the first indication of a relationship between therapist competence and clinical outcome for panic disorder (r = .29–.35); no relationship was found for the CTS-R.

These findings provide initial support for the reliability and validity of the CTCP for assessing therapist competence in CBT for panic disorder and support the use of anxiety disorder-specific competence measures. Further investigation into the psychometric properties of the measure in other therapist cohorts and its relationship with clinical outcomes is recommended.

1. (1) To learn how to deliver all of the core interventions of CT-SAD remotely.

2. (2) To learn novel ways of carrying out behavioural experiments remotely when some in-person social situations might not be possible.

1. (1) To recognise PTSD following admissions to intensive care units (ICUs).

2. (2) To understand how the ICU experience can lead to PTSD development.

3. (3) To understand how Ehlers and Clark’s (2000) cognitive model of PTSD can be applied to post-ICU PTSD.

4. (4) To be able to apply cognitive therapy for PTSD to patients with post-ICU PTSD.