Childhood obesity is a growing concern, and while progress has been made to understand the association between multiple biological factors (i.e., genetics, nutrition, exercise etc.), little is known about the relationship between mental health and childhood obesity. In this paper, we offer a review of current evidence about the association between mental health and childhood obesity. A systematic literature search of peer-reviewed, English-language studies published between January 2000 and January 2011 was undertaken and resulted in 759 unique records, of which 345 full-text articles were retrieved and 131 articles were included. A theoretical model is proposed to organize the paper and reflect the current state of the literature and includes psychological factors (i.e., depression and anxiety, self-esteem, body dissatisfaction, eating disordered symptoms, and emotional problems); psychosocial mediating variables (i.e., weight-based teasing and concern about weight and shape), and wellness factors (i.e., quality of life and resiliency/protective factors). We conclude with a number of recommendations to support the creation of solutions to the rise in childhood obesity rates that do not further marginalize overweight and obese children and youth and that can potentially improve the well-being of all children and youth regardless of their weight status.

Healthcare and social services professionals are being called to engage in interprofessional education (IPE) and interprofessional collaboration (IPC) in order to provide efficient and effective care to clients and patients. As such, it is important to conduct research that contributes to evaluation of collaborative practice. A necessary component to any strong quantitative research methodology is the type of instruments used for data collection. However, identifying valid and reliable instruments to use in this area of research can be a daunting task. The purpose of this paper is to review the quantitative measures (i.e., surveys and questionnaires) described in the interprofessional literature. Twenty-three instruments were identified and analyzed for validity and reliability statistics, sample size, ease of access to items on measure, and applicability of measure to diverse professional populations. The two primary measures reviewed are the Readiness for Interprofessional Learning Scale (Parsell & Bligh, <!--RIDCIT0033--> 33. Parsell, G., Bligh, J. (1998). Educational principles underpinning successful shared learning. Medical Teacher, 20(6), 522–529. [Taylor & Francis Online] View all references ) and the Interdisciplinary Education Perception Scale (Luecht, Madsen, Taugher, & Petterson, <!--RIDCIT0025--> 25. Luecht, R., Madsen, M., Taugher, M., Petterson, B. (1990). Assessing professional perceptions: Design and validation of an interdisciplinary education perception scale. Journal of Allied Health, 19(2), 181–191. View all references ). Limited information existed for the remaining measures. Despite the number of measures available for assessing and evaluating IPE and IPC, most lack sufficient theoretical and psychometric development. Several issues that impact the development of sound measures are discussed and implications for future IPC are proposed.

Weight bias is a form of stigma with detrimental effects on the health and wellness of individuals with large bodies. Researchers from various disciplines have recognized weight bias as an important topic for public health and for professional practice. To date, researchers from various areas have approached weight bias from independent perspectives and from differing theoretical orientations. In this paper, we examined the similarities and differences between three perspectives (i.e., weight-centric, non-weight-centric (health-centric), and health at every size) used to understand weight bias and approach weight bias research with regard to (a) language about people with large bodies, (b) theoretical position, (c) identified consequences of weight bias, and (d) identified influences on weight-based social inequity. We suggest that, despite differences, each perspective acknowledges the negative influences that position weight as being within individual control and the negative consequences of weight bias. We call for recognition and discussion of weight bias as a social justice issue in order to change the discourse and professional practices extended towards individuals with large bodies. We advocate for an emphasis on social justice as a uniting framework for interdisciplinary research on weight bias.

Weight-related issues (including excess weight, disordered eating and body concerns) are often considered as comprising distinct domains of ‘obesity’ and ‘eating disorders’. In this commentary we argue that the concept of weight bias is an important variable when considering wellbeing across the spectrum of weight-related issues. We make the following six points in support of this argument: i) weight bias is common and has adverse health consequences, ii) shaming individuals for their body weight does not motivate positive behaviour change, iii) internalized weight bias is particularly problematic, iv) public health interventions, if not carefully thought out, can perpetuate weight bias, v) weight bias is a manifestation of social inequity, and vi) action on weight bias requires an upstream, population-level approach. To achieve sustainable reductions in weight bias at a population level, substantive modifications and collaborative efforts in multiple settings must be initiated. We provide several examples of population-level interventions to reduce weight bias.