Next Article in Journal
Impact of Computed Tomography-Defined Osteopenia on Outcomes of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation: A Single-Center Retrospective Study
Previous Article in Journal
Evaluating Behavioural Interventions for Oropharyngeal Dysphagia in Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Swallowing Manoeuvres, Exercises, and Postural Techniques
Previous Article in Special Issue
The Impact of Co-Occurring Behavioral and Emotional Problems on the Quality of Life of Caregivers of Autistic Children: A Preliminary Study
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
JCM
Volume 14
Issue 20
10.3390/jcm14207177
jcm-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Peer Relationships and Psychosocial Difficulties in Adolescents: Evidence from a Clinical Pediatric Sample

by
Leonardo Tadonio
1,
Antonella Giudice
2,
Claudia Infantino
2,
Simone Pilloni
2,
Matteo Verdesca
2,
Viviana Patianna
2,
Gilberto Gerra
1 and
Susanna Esposito
2,*
1
Department of Mental Health, AUSL Parma, 43126 Parma, Italy
2
Pediatric Clinic, Department of Medicine and Surgery, University of Parma, 43126 Parma, Italy
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
J. Clin. Med. 2025, 14(20), 7177; https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm14207177 (registering DOI)
Submission received: 22 August 2025 / Revised: 30 September 2025 / Accepted: 8 October 2025 / Published: 11 October 2025
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Targeted Diagnosis and Treatment of Maladaptive Developmental Trajectories and Psychopathological Manifestations in Children and Adolescents)
Browse Figure
Review Reports Versions Notes

Abstract

Background: Adolescence is a critical developmental stage marked by vulnerability to psychological difficulties. While family relationships, peer bonds, prosocial behaviors, and health-risk factors have been linked to adolescent mental health, few studies have examined their joint effects in clinical pediatric populations. This study assessed demographic, clinical, relational, and behavioral predictors of psychological difficulties in Italian adolescents. Methods: A cross-sectional sample of 177 adolescents (aged 11–14 years) from a pediatric clinic completed the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ). The Total Difficulties (SDQ TD) score was the main outcome. Associations were tested with ordinary least squares (OLS) and confirmed using robust MM regression. Bootstrap confidence intervals and Benjamini–Hochberg corrections were applied. Sensitivity analyses excluded the Peer Problems subscale to address part–whole overlap. Results: Higher friendship satisfaction was consistently associated with fewer psychological difficulties, confirming its role as a strong protective factor. Prosocial behavior and male sex were also linked to fewer difficulties in initial analyses, though these associations were less stable after correction. Sensitivity analyses further supported the protective value of friendship satisfaction, even when accounting for overlap with peer problems. Despite relatively low overall levels of psychological difficulties, nearly one-quarter of adolescents met the clinical cut-off for eating disorder risk. Conclusions: Friendship satisfaction was the strongest protective factor, while prosocial behavior and sex showed weaker consistency. Findings suggest that distinct aspects of peer relationships jointly shape adolescents’ psychological outcomes. Interventions promoting social functioning may support mental health in clinical youth populations.

1. Introduction

Adolescence is a key developmental stage, usually covering the second decade of life, marked by major biological, psychological, and social changes. These include brain maturation, identity formation, greater independence from parents, and stronger focus on peers [1,2,3]. While this period offers growth opportunities, it also brings higher vulnerability to emotional and behavioral problems [4,5], with long-term effects on adult mental health [6].
The Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) is widely used to assess adolescent psychosocial functioning [7]. It measures both difficulties (emotional, conduct, hyperactivity–inattention, peer problems) and strengths (prosocial behavior). High SDQ Total Difficulties (TD) scores are linked to poor school outcomes, psychiatric diagnoses, and social exclusion [8,9]. These difficulties are influenced by multiple demographic, medical, relational, and behavioral factors.
Family relationships are central to adolescent well-being. Warm, supportive parent-child bonds predict fewer emotional and behavioral problems [10,11,12] by strengthening resilience, self-esteem, and emotional regulation [13,14]. As peer time increases, friendships become equally important [15,16]. Satisfying friendships protect against loneliness, depression, and behavioral issues [17,18,19], while poor friendships or conflict increase distress [20].
Prosocial behavior—helping, sharing, comforting—has also been tied to better emotional adjustment and stronger social skills [21,22]. Adolescents who act prosocially often report higher peer acceptance, self-worth, and fewer behavioral problems [23].
Physical health is another factor. Chronic conditions (e.g., asthma, endocrine or gastrointestinal disorders) can add stress, limit activities, and raise concerns about health or body image [24,25]. Such conditions are linked to higher depressive symptoms and lower quality of life [26].
Risk behaviors complicate this picture. Alcohol and nicotine use, even at low levels, are associated with psychological difficulties [27,28,29,30]. Cannabis use has been linked to cognitive and educational problems and greater psychiatric risk [31]. Substance-use habits formed in adolescence often persist into adulthood, highlighting the need for early detection [32].
Despite rich evidence, few studies have explored these factors together in clinical pediatric populations. Adolescents in pediatric clinics face both medical and developmental challenges [33]. Cultural context also matters: in Italy, family ties are emphasized, but peers and autonomy are increasingly important, sometimes creating tensions [34,35,36].
Compared to community samples, clinical adolescents may deal with added stress from chronic illness, medical monitoring, and disrupted routines, which can affect social life and increase psychosocial vulnerability [37]. Studying them is crucial for understanding both general and context-specific influences on adjustment and for guiding interventions. Pediatric clinics are also well-placed for early detection of emotional and behavioral issues.
We developed four hypotheses:
  • H1: Higher friendship satisfaction predicts fewer difficulties.
  • H2: Greater prosocial behavior predicts fewer difficulties.
  • H3: Females report more difficulties than males.
  • H4: Chronic illness, eating disorder risk, and substance use predict more difficulties.
This study tests how demographic, relational, behavioral, and clinical factors jointly relate to psychological difficulties in Italian adolescents attending a pediatric clinic. Identifying key predictors in this setting can inform psychosocial screening and support in pediatric care.

2. Methods

2.1. Study Design and Population

This cross-sectional observational study was conducted in a pediatric outpatient clinic in Italy (Parma University Hospital, Parma, Italy) and involved a consecutive sample of 177 adolescents aged between 11 and 14 years. Recruitment took place during routine clinical appointments, and both adolescents and their parents or legal guardians were invited to participate. Eligibility criteria included being within the specified age range and demonstrating sufficient comprehension to complete a set of self-report questionnaires in Italian. Adolescents were excluded if they presented with acute medical emergencies, severe psychiatric crises requiring immediate intervention, or cognitive impairments that would prevent reliable self-reporting. Prior to participation, written informed consent was obtained from the parents or guardians, and assent was secured from the adolescent. The self-report questionnaires were administered anonymously and without the presence of parents or guardians to ensure privacy and minimize potential response biases, particularly social desirability and parental influence [38]. The study protocol was approved by the relevant institutional ethics committee and adhered to the principles outlined in the Declaration of Helsinki.

2.2. Measures

Psychological difficulties were assessed using the Italian self-report form of the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) [7] for adolescents aged 11–17 years, focusing on the Total Difficulties (SDQ TD) score. This SDQ TD was derived from the sum of the Emotional Symptoms, Conduct Problems, Hyperactivity-nattention, and Peer Problems subscales (Cronbach’s α = 0.78 in the present sample). It ranges from 0 to 40, with higher values indicating greater psychological difficulties.
Medical conditions were clinician-assessed and classified as acute or chronic. All other predictors were obtained via adolescent self-report. Demographic variables included age, sex, and citizenship (Italian vs. non-Italian). Relational variables comprised mother-relationship, father-relationship, and friendship satisfaction, each assessed with a single-item Likert-type rating from 1 (not at all satisfied) to 5 (very satisfied). Eating disorder (ED) risk was assessed with the SCOFF [39] and coded as positive when the score was ≥3, following validation in Italian samples [40]. Prosocial behavior was measured using the SDQ Prosocial subscale (Cronbach’s α = 0.72), with higher scores reflecting greater prosocial tendencies. Adolescents indicated whether they had used alcohol, nicotine, or cannabis in their lifetime, during the past year, and in the past-30-day, with responses coded as yes/no. Nicotine use encompassed both traditional tobacco smoking and the use of electronic nicotine delivery systems, such as e-cigarettes.
Although normative data for the Italian self-report form of the SDQ are currently lacking, this version of the instrument has been previously used in Italian adolescent populations [41,42]. While the three- and five-factor models of the SDQ are frequently used in the literature, their structure has not been consistently replicated across cultures [43]. Based on this, we used the SDQ Total Difficulties score and the Prosocial subscale, which represent the two core dimensions of the instrument.
The SCOFF questionnaire has previously been used as a screening tool for eating disorder risk in adolescent studies, both in community samples and in clinical populations, such as adolescents with type 1 diabetes [44,45].

2.3. Statistical Analysis

All analyses were conducted on the complete dataset, as no data were missing. The primary outcome was the SDQ Total Difficulties (SDQ TD) score (Cronbach’s α = 0.78), which showed an approximately symmetric distribution (skewness = 0.30; excess kurtosis = −0.58) without ceiling or floor effects. Although the Shapiro-Wilk test indicated non-normality (p = 0.006), inspection of the histogram and Q-Q plot suggested only minor departures, supporting its treatment as a continuous outcome. Bivariate associations among predictors were examined using Spearman’s ρ and rank-biserial correlations (for binary-continuous pairs). To reduce redundancy, only past-30-day substance-use indicators were retained; cannabis use was excluded due to its very low prevalence (2/177).
We fitted an ordinary least-squares (OLS) multiple regression including 11 prespecified predictors (five continuous, six binary; all binary variables dummy-coded). Model diagnostics supported OLS assumptions: scatterplots and component-plus-residual plots indicated linearity of continuous predictors, variance inflation factors were <2, and homoscedasticity and residual normality were supported by both formal tests and visual inspection. Influential cases were identified Via leverage, Cook’s distance, DFFITS, and DFBETAS [46]. Given their presence, we also fitted a robust MM regression [47,48] as a secondary confirmatory analysis, using the robust-base package (Tukey’s bisquare ψ-function, default tuning c = 4.685, ~95% efficiency under normality). This estimator down-weights the influence of outliers and high-leverage points while preserving the interpretability of coefficients. For each model, both unstandardized (B) and standardized (β) coefficients were estimated, with the latter obtained by z-standardizing the outcome and predictors prior to model fitting.
Uncertainty for both OLS and robust models was quantified Via nonparametric pairs (case) bootstrap (boot package; R = 5000; seed = 1234), resampling rows with replacement and refitting the model at each resample. For unstandardized coefficients, we report 95% bias-corrected and accelerated (BCa) confidence intervals (CI) and bootstrap standard errors [49]. Two-sided bootstrap p-values were adjusted for multiplicity via the Benjamini-Hochberg (BH) procedure (q = 0.05) for false discovery rate (FDR) control within each model [50].
This analytical strategy was adopted to strengthen the robustness of findings based on real-world clinical data. We used robust MM regression to confirm the OLS findings, assess the stability of results, and reduce the impact of outliers. The bootstrap procedures supported inference under non-normality and in small samples, while FDR correction offers a balanced trade-off between sensitivity (true positives) and specificity (false discovery control).
A targeted sensitivity analysis was conducted to address potential part-whole overlap between the Peer Relationships Problems subscale from the SDQ TD and the predictor Friendship Satisfaction. Both OLS and robust MM models were re-estimated using SDQ TD15—SDQ TD, excluding the Peer Problems subscale, under the same bootstrap and BH adjustment procedures.
All analyses were performed in R version 4.3.2 (R Core Team, 2023) [51].

3. Results

The sample consists of 177 adolescents aged 11–14 years (M = 12.51, SD = 1.11). Males represented 56.5% (n = 100) of the participants, while 93.2% (n = 165) were Italian citizens. Clinicians assessed that 71.8% (n = 127) of the sample had a chronic medical condition. Relationship satisfaction was high with both parents (mothers: M = 4.37, SD = 0.83; fathers: M = 4.21, SD = 0.96) as well as with friends (M = 4.22, SD = 0.88). The mean SDQ TD score was 10.62 (SD = 5.46), and the mean prosocial behavior score was 7.62 (SD = 1.99). As a whole, these results suggest low levels of psychological difficulties and normative prosocial functioning. However, 23.2% (n = 41) of adolescents were classified as at risk for eating disorders according to the SCOFF clinical cut-off. Overall, rates of substance use were relatively low across all substances and time frames assessed. An exception was lifetime alcohol use reported by 19.8% (n = 35) of participants. In the past 30 days, alcohol, nicotine, and cannabis use were disclosed by 9.0% (n = 16), 7.3% (n = 13), and 1.1% (n = 2) of adolescents, respectively. Descriptive statistics are presented in Table 1.
Spearman’s and rank-biserial correlation coefficients are reported in Table S1. Mother-relationship and father–relationship satisfaction were strongly intercorrelated (ρ = 0.69), whereas friendship satisfaction showed only weak, non-significant associations with mother–adolescent (ρ = 0.15) and father-adolescent satisfaction (ρ = 0.12), consistent with a distinct construct. Prosocial behavior correlated positively with mother-adolescent (ρ = 0.30) and father-adolescent satisfaction (ρ = 0.32). Age was moderately negatively associated with parental satisfaction (ρ = −0.24 to −0.31). Indicators of alcohol and nicotine use across all time frames were strongly intercorrelated (ρ = 0.63–0.88); therefore, only past-30-day indicators were included in the regression analyses. Cannabis (past 30 days) was excluded because of very low prevalence (2/177). Eating disorder risk showed small positive associations with alcohol and nicotine use (ρ = 0.17–0.25) but no significant associations with parental or friendship satisfaction.
We then tested the simultaneous effects of all predictors on SDQ TD using an OLS multiple linear regression (Table 2).
The model explained 41% of the variance (R2 = 0.41, adj. R2 = 0.37; F(11, 165) = 10.46, p < 0.001). After BH adjustment of bootstrap p-values, three predictors remained statistically significant: friendship satisfaction (B = −2.05, 95% BCa CI [−2.71, −1.31], pBH < 0.001), sex (female = 1; B = 2.30, 95% BCa CI [0.91, 3.70], pBH = 0.002), and prosocial behavior (B = −0.64, 95% BCa CI [−1.04, −0.27], pBH = 0.006). Father-relationship satisfaction showed an inverse association with psychological difficulties, but did not retain significance after FDR adjustment (pBH = 0.054). All other variables—age, chronic condition, Italian citizenship, mother-relationship satisfaction, ED risk, and past-30-day alcohol and nicotine use—were not statistically significant after adjustment. Comparing the relative magnitudes of the standardized coefficients, friendship satisfaction (β = −0.33) emerged as the strongest protective factor. Prosocial behavior (β = −0.23, pBH = 0.006) and female sex (β = 0.21, pBH = 0.002) were also significantly associated with SDQ TD, indicating respectively a protective effect and greater difficulties among adolescent girls.
As a targeted sensitivity analysis to address potential part-whole overlap between friendship satisfaction and the Peer Problems subscale, we re-estimated the models using SDQ TD15 (excluding Peer Problems). In these models, the strength of the friendship satisfaction association was attenuated, with the standardized coefficient decreasing from βOLS = −0.33 (SDQ TD) to βOLS = −0.24 (SDQ TD15) and from βrobust = −0.34 to −0.23, corresponding to a ≈27–32% reduction in magnitude. In the OLS model, the effect remained statistically significant after BH adjustment (pBH < 0.001), whereas in the robust MM model, it was of similar magnitude but did not reach the conventional significance threshold (pBH = 0.101). In both models, however, the unadjusted 95% BCa CIs excluded zero (Supplementary Table S6).
As shown in Table 2 (last column), we assessed the sensitivity of coefficients to influential observations, calculated as Δ = Brobust − BOLS. Coefficients with |Δ| ≤ 0.10 were considered stable. Friendship satisfaction (|Δ| = 0.04), prosocial behavior (0.07), ED risk (0.06), and past-30-day alcohol use (0.01) met this criterion. Father-relationship satisfaction was borderline (|Δ| = 0.11). All other variables—age (0.28), chronic condition (0.33), Italian citizenship (0.17), mother–relationship satisfaction (0.20), and past-30-day nicotine use (0.73)—exceeded this threshold, indicating greater susceptibility to influential cases.
To facilitate direct comparison of effect sizes and statistical significance across estimation methods, we present a forest plot in Figure 1.
Controlling for all covariates, friendship satisfaction showed the largest association with SDQ TD: higher satisfaction was linked to fewer difficulties, and this effect was robust across both OLS and robust MM estimators. It was the only predictor to retain statistical significance after BH adjustment in both models, underscoring its stable protective role. In the primary OLS analysis, prosocial behavior and sex also remained significant after BH correction. However, although both estimators yielded 95% BCa CIs excluding zero, these two effects did not survive BH adjustment in the robust MM model, indicating some sensitivity to the down-weighting of influential observations.
The Supplementary Materials provide: correlation matrix among study variables (p-values BH-adjusted) (Table S1); the correlation matrix of the study variables (Table S2); OLS model influence diagnostics (SDQ TD) (Table S3); variance inflation factors (VIF) for predictors in the OLS model (SDQ TD) (Table S4); comparison of OLS and robust MM regression estimates for SDQ TD outcome; (Table S5) comparison of OLS and robust MM regression estimates for SDQ TD15 outcome (Table S6); model fit statistics for OLS and robust MM regression models with SDQ TD and SDQ TD15 outcomes (Table S7); distribution of SDQ Total Difficulties score (SDQ TD) (Figure S1); component−plus−residual (partial) plots for continuous predictors in the OLS model with SDQ TD as the outcome (Figure S2); standard diag-nostic plots for the OLS regression model with SDQ TD as the outcome: residuals vs. fitted values, scale–location plot, Q–Q plot of residuals, and residuals vs. leverage (Figure S3);. influence diag-nostics thresholds and counts for OLS model (Figure S4).

4. Discussion

This study examined how demographic, medical, relational, behavioral, and prosocial factors relate to psychological difficulties in Italian adolescents attending a pediatric clinic. Using OLS and robust MM regression with bootstrap and FDR correction, we aimed to identify stable predictors. Our results add to existing research on adolescent mental health. Consistent with prior studies, friendship satisfaction emerged as the strongest protective factor [16,18,21,52]. Unlike earlier findings, however, parental satisfaction and substance use were not significant, possibly due to high parental satisfaction levels and the low prevalence of substance use in our sample [10,11,12,25,26,27].
Friendship satisfaction showed the largest and most consistent effect, supporting evidence that positive peer bonds buffer against stress and reduce symptoms [20,53]. Its stability across methods, even after excluding peer problems from the SDQ, suggests a robust protective role. Cultural factors may influence this effect: in Italy, where family ties are emphasized but peer influence is growing, friendships may take on particular importance [33,34,35]. For adolescents with chronic illness, friendships may provide vital support when other social opportunities are limited [24].
Prosocial behavior was linked to fewer difficulties in OLS models, consistent with theories that helping others fosters peer acceptance, empathy, and self-worth [23,24,54,55,56,57]. However, this effect was weaker after correction, suggesting less robust evidence. Female sex was associated with greater difficulties, aligning with epidemiological studies showing higher internalizing symptoms among girls [58,59,60,61,62], though this effect also weakened in robust analyses.
Contrary to some studies [13,63,64], parental satisfaction, chronic medical conditions, eating disorder (ED) risk, and substance use were not significant predictors. For chronic conditions, psychosocial outcomes may depend more on perceived illness impact than diagnosis alone [26,27]. ED risk was also unrelated, perhaps because early eating concerns reflect a mix of personal and environmental factors [65,66], and the SDQ may be less sensitive to ED-specific problems [67]. Low prevalence and binary assessment of substance use likely reduced power to detect associations.
Clinically, the findings highlight the importance of assessing friendship quality. Interventions that promote positive peer interactions could protect adolescent mental health in both schools and clinics [65,66,67,68]. Prosocial behavior may also serve as a modifiable factor, though evidence was less consistent [69,70]. Gender-sensitive approaches may help address girls’ heightened vulnerabilities.
Strengths of this study include a well-defined clinical sample, simultaneous testing of multiple predictors, and robust statistical methods. Limitations include the modest sample size, cross-sectional design, single-item measures for relationships, and omission of key confounders such as SES and family structure. Importantly, we did not assess medication use or BMI, both of which may influence psychological functioning and should be considered in future work. Finally, the clinical context improves relevance for pediatric care but may reduce comparability with community samples.
Future research should use larger and longitudinal samples, explore cultural and illness-specific contexts, and test interventions targeting friendship quality and prosocial behavior. As online and offline peer interactions increasingly shape adolescent development, their combined effects on mental health warrant investigation [71].

5. Conclusions

In this clinical sample of Italian adolescents, friendship satisfaction emerged as the most stable protective factor against psychological difficulties. Prosocial behavior and sex were also linked to fewer difficulties, although these associations did not remain significant in confirmatory analyses. Alongside friendship satisfaction, low levels of peer problems appeared to be important, as shown by the attenuation of the effect once the Peer Problems subscale was excluded. Taken together, these findings show that peer relationships play a multidimensional role in adolescent mental health—through both friendship satisfaction and difficulties in peer relationships—and underscore the importance of pediatric care interventions that support adolescents’ social functioning and the development of supportive peer experiences.

Supplementary Materials

The following supporting information can be downloaded at https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/jcm14207177/s1, Table S1. Correlation matrix among study variables (p-values BH-adjusted); Table S2. the correlation matrix of the study variables; Table S3. OLS model influence diagnostics (SDQ TD); Table S4. Variance inflation factors (VIF) for predictors in the OLS model (SDQ TD); Table S5. Comparison of OLS and robust MM regression estimates for SDQ TD outcome; Table S6. Comparison of OLS and robust MM regression estimates for SDQ TD15 outcome; Table S7. Model fit statistics for OLS and robust MM regression models with SDQ TD and SDQ TD15 outcomes; Figure S1. Distribution of SDQ Total Difficulties score (SDQ TD); Figure S2. Component−plus−residual (partial) plots for continuous predictors in the OLS model with SDQ TD as the outcome; Figure S3. Standard diagnostic plots for the OLS regression model with SDQ TD as the outcome: residuals vs. fitted values, scale–location plot, Q–Q plot of residuals, and residuals vs. leverage; Figure S4. Influence diagnostics thresholds and counts for OLS model.

Author Contributions

L.T. wrote the first draft of the manuscript and performed the statistical analyses; A.G., C.I., S.P., M.V. and V.P. enrolled the study population; G.G. gave a substantial scientific contribution; S.E. supervised the project, revised the manuscript, and provided a substantial scientific contribution. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

The study was reviewed and approved by the Local Ethics Committee of the Parma University Hospital (prot. Number 1776, 5 November 2022).

Informed Consent Statement

Parents/legal guardians and adolescents provided their written informed consent to participate in this study.

Data Availability Statement

All the available data are included in the manuscript and in Supplementary Materials.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Patton, G.C.; Sawyer, S.M.; Santelli, J.S.; Ross, D.A.; Afifi, R.; Allen, N.B.; Arora, M.; Azzopardi, P.; Baldwin, W.; Bonell, C.; et al. Our future: A Lancet commission on adolescent health and wellbeing. Lancet 2016, 387, 2423–2478. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Steinberg, L. Adolescence, 11th ed.; McGraw Hill: New York, NY, USA, 2016; 560p. [Google Scholar]
  3. Chmiel, M.; Kroplewski, Z. Personal Values and Psychological Well-Being Among Emerging Adults: The Mediating Role of Meaning in Life. Brain Sci. 2025, 15, 930. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Sawyer, S.M.; Azzopardi, P.S.; Wickremarathne, D.; Patton, G.C. The age of adolescence. Lancet Child Adolesc. Health 2018, 2, 223–228. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Zhou, Y.; Neale, M.C. Adolescent suicide behaviors associate with accelerated reductions in cortical gray matter volume and slower decay of behavioral activation Fun-Seeking scores. Sci. Rep. 2025, 15, 32886. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Viner, R.M.; Ross, D.; Hardy, R.; Kuh, D.; Power, C.; Johnson, A.; Wellings, K.; McCambridge, J.; Cole, T.J.; Kelly, Y.; et al. Life course epidemiology: Recognising the importance of adolescence. J. Epidemiol. Community Health 2015, 69, 719–720. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Goodman, R.; Meltzer, H.; Bailey, V. The Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire: A pilot study on the validity of the self-report version. Eur. Child Adolesc. Psychiatry 1998, 7, 125–130. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Goodman, A.; Goodman, R. Strengths and difficulties questionnaire as a dimensional measure of child mental health. J. Am. Acad. Child Adolesc. Psychiatry 2009, 48, 400–403. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Malhi, P.; Bharti, B.; Sidhu, M. Peer victimization among adolescents: Relational and physical aggression in Indian schools. Psychol. Stud. 2015, 60, 77–83. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Keilow, M.; Sievertsen, H.H.; Niclasen, J.; Obel, C. The Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire and standardized academic tests: Reliability across respondent type and age. PLoS ONE 2019, 14, e0220193. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  11. Zsakai, A.; Ratz-Sulyok, F.Z.; Koronczai, B.; Varro, P.; Toth, E.; Szarvas, S.; Tauber, T.; Karkus, Z.; Molnar, K. Risk and protective factors for health behaviour in adolescence in Europe. Sci. Rep. 2023, 13, 18638. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  12. Ji, H.; Wang, Y. The development of behavioral problems in middle childhood: The role of early and recent stressors. J. Fam. Psychol. 2025, 39, 977–986. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Laursen, B.; Collins, W.A. Parent–child relationships during adolescence. In Handbook of Adolescent Psychology, 3rd ed.; Lerner, R.M., Steinberg, L., Eds.; Wiley: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2009; Volume 2, pp. 3–42. [Google Scholar]
  14. Kim, S.G.; Holland, A.; Brezinski, K.; Tu, K.M.; McElwain, N.L. Adolescent-Mother Attachment and Dyadic Affective Processes: Predictors of Internalizing and Externalizing Symptoms. J. Youth Adolesc. 2025, 54, 736–749. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Steinberg, L.; Morris, A.S. Adolescent development. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 2001, 52, 83–110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Hartup, W.W.; Stevens, N. Friendships and adaptation in the life course. Psychol. Bull. 1997, 121, 355–370. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Rubin, K.H.; Bukowski, W.M.; Parker, J.G. Peer interactions, relationships, and groups. In Handbook of Child Psychology, 6th ed.; Damon, W., Lerner, R.M., Eisenberg, N., Eds.; Wiley: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2006; Volume 3, pp. 571–645. [Google Scholar]
  18. Bagwell, C.L.; Schmidt, M.E. Friendships in Childhood and Adolescence; Guilford Press: New York, NY, USA, 2011. [Google Scholar]
  19. Zingora, T.; Flache, A. Effects of Friendship Influence and Normative Pressure on Adolescent Attitudes and Behaviors. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 2025. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  20. Wentzel, K.R.; Barry, C.M.; Caldwell, K.A. Friendships in middle school: Influences on motivation and school adjustment. J. Educ. Psychol. 2004, 96, 195–203. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Sentse, M.; Lindenberg, S.; Omvlee, A.; Ormel, J.; Veenstra, R. Rejection and acceptance across contexts: Parents and peers as risks and buffers for early adolescent psychopathology. The TRAILS study. J. Abnorm. Child Psychol. 2010, 38, 119–130. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Cherewick, M.; Davenport, M.R.; Lama, R.; Giri, P.; Mukhia, D.; Rai, R.P.; Cruz, C.M.; Matergia, M. Control-Oriented and Escape-Oriented Coping: Links to Social Support and Mental Health in Early Adolescents. Eur. J. Investig. Health Psychol. Educ. 2025, 15, 172. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Eisenberg, N.; Spinrad, T.L.; Knafo-Noam, A. Prosocial development. In Handbook of Child Psychology and Developmental Science, 7th ed.; Lerner, R.M., Lamb, M.E., Eds.; Wiley: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2015; Volume 3, pp. 610–656. [Google Scholar]
  24. Padilla-Walker, L.M.; Carlo, G. Prosocial development: A multidimensional approach. In The Oxford Handbook of Human Development and Culture; Jensen, L.A., Ed.; Oxford University Press: New York, NY, USA, 2015; pp. 206–221. [Google Scholar]
  25. von Rezori, R.E.; Baumeister, H.; Holl, R.W.; Meissner, T.; Minden, K.; Mueller-Stierlin, A.S.; Temming, S.; Warschburger, P. Prospective associations between coping, benefit-finding and growth, and subjective well-being in youths with chronic health conditions: A two-wave cross-lagged analysis. J. Pediatr. Psychol. 2025, jsaf087. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Surís, J.C.; Michaud, P.A.; Viner, R. The adolescent with a chronic condition. Part I: Developmental issues. Arch. Dis. Child. 2004, 89, 938–942. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Pinquart, M.; Shen, Y. Depressive symptoms in children and adolescents with chronic physical illness: An updated meta-analysis. J. Pediatr. Psychol. 2011, 36, 375–384. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Chassin, L.; Pitts, S.C.; Prost, J. Binge drinking trajectories from adolescence to emerging adulthood in a high-risk sample: Predictors and substance abuse outcomes. J. Consult. Clin. Psychol. 2002, 70, 67–78. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Fergusson, D.M.; Boden, J.M.; Horwood, L.J. The developmental antecedents of illicit drug use: Evidence from a 25-year longitudinal study. Drug Alcohol. Depend. 2008, 96, 165–177. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Esposito, S.; Campana, B.R.; Argentiero, A.; Masetti, M.; Fainardi, V.; Principi, N. Too young to pour: The global crisis of underage alcohol use. Front. Public Health 2025, 13, 1598175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Windle, M. Alcohol use among adolescents and young adults. Alcohol. Res. Health 2003, 27, 79–85. [Google Scholar]
  32. Degenhardt, L.; Coffey, C.; Romaniuk, H.; Swift, W.; Carlin, J.B.; Hall, W.D.; Patton, G.C. The persistence of the association between adolescent cannabis use and common mental disorders into young adulthood. Addiction 2013, 108, 124–133. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Chen, C.Y.; Storr, C.L.; Anthony, J.C. Early-onset drug use and risk for drug dependence problems. Addict. Behav. 2009, 34, 319–322. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Sawyer, S.M.; Drew, S.; Yeo, M.S.; Britto, M.T. Adolescents with a chronic condition: Challenges living, challenges treating. Lancet 2007, 369, 1481–1489. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Chebli, K.; Gritti, A.; Calia, C. Bridging cultural sensitivity and ethical practice: Expert narratives on child and adolescent mental health in Kuwait. Clin. Child. Psychol. Psychiatry. 2025. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Kiang, L.; Fuligni, A.J. Ethnic identity and family processes among adolescents from Latin American, Asian, and European backgrounds. J. Youth Adolesc. 2009, 38, 228–241. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Molinari, L.; Speltini, G. Parental attachment, self-esteem and social competence: Relationships between variables in the Italian context. TPM Test. Psychom. Methodol. Appl. Psychol. 2008, 15, 207–220. [Google Scholar]
  38. Brener, N.D.; Billy, J.O.G.; Grady, W.R. Assessment of factors affecting the validity of self-reported health-risk behavior among adolescents: Evidence from the scientific literature. J. Adolesc. Health 2003, 33, 436–457. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Morgan, J.F.; Reid, F.; Lacey, J.H. The SCOFF questionnaire: A new screening tool for eating disorders. West. J. Med. 2000, 172, 164–165. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Pannocchia, L.; Fiorino, M.; Giannini, M.; Vanderlinden, J. A psychometric exploration of an Italian translation of the SCOFF questionnaire. Eur. Eat. Disord. Rev. 2011, 19, 371–373. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Benedetto, L.; Rollo, S.; Cafeo, A.; Di Rosa, G.; Pino, R.; Gagliano, A.; Germanò, E.; Ingrassia, M. Emotional and behavioural factors predisposing to internet addiction: The smartphone distraction among Italian high school students. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2024, 21, 386. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Conte, G.; Arigliani, E.; Martinelli, M.; Di Noia, S.; Chiarotti, F.; Cardona, F. Daydreaming and psychopathology in adolescence: An exploratory study. Early Interv. Psychiatry 2023, 17, 263–271. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Essau, C.A.; Olaya, B.; Pasha, G.; Gilvarry, C.; Bray, D. The structure of the Strength and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) in adolescents from five ethnic groups. Psychiatry Res. 2012, 199, 223–228. [Google Scholar]
  44. Cerniglia, L.; Cimino, S. Eating disorders and internalizing/externalizing symptoms in adolescents before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. J. Am. Nutr. Assoc. 2023, 42, 445–451. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. D’Anna, G.; Lazzeretti, M.; Castellini, G.; Ricca, V.; Cassioli, E.; Rossi, E.; Silvestri, C.; Voller, F. Risk of eating disorders in a representative sample of Italian adolescents: Prevalence and association with self-reported interpersonal factors. Eat. Weight Disord. 2022, 27, 701–708. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Stevens, J.P. Applied Multivariate Statistics for the Social Sciences, 4th ed.; Lawrence Erlbaum Associates: Mahwah, NJ, USA, 2002; pp. 125–138. [Google Scholar]
  47. Yohai, V.J. High breakdown-point and high efficiency robust estimates for regression. Ann. Stat. 1987, 15, 642–656. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Koller, M.; Stahel, W.A. Sharpening Wald-type inference in robust regression for small samples. Comput. Stat. Data Anal. 2011, 55, 2504–2515. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Efron, B. Better bootstrap confidence intervals. J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 1987, 82, 171–185. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Benjamini, Y.; Hochberg, Y. Controlling the false discovery rate: A practical and powerful approach to multiple testing. J. R. Stat. Soc. Series B Stat. Methodol. 1995, 57, 289–300. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. R Core Team. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing; Version 4.3.2; R Foundation for Statistical Computing: Vienna, Austria, 2023; Available online: https://www.R-project.org/ (accessed on 7 October 2025).
  52. Santucci, K.; Dirks, M.A.; Lydon, J.E. With or without you: Understanding friendship dissolution from childhood through young adulthood. J. Soc. Pers. Relat. 2025, 42, 2675–2699. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Nwabueze, K.K.; Akubue, N.; Onakoya, A.; Okolieze, S.C.; Otaniyen-Igbinoba, I.J.; Chukwunonye, C.; Okengwu, C.G.; Ige, T.; Alao, O.J.; Adindu, K.N. Exploring the prevalence and risk factors of adolescent mental health issues in the COVID and post-COVID era in the U.K.: A systematic review. EXCLI J. 2025, 24, 508–523. [Google Scholar]
  54. Carlo, G.; Crockett, L.J.; Randall, B.A.; Roesch, S.C. A latent growth curve analysis of prosocial behavior among rural adolescents. J. Res. Adolesc. 2007, 17, 301–324. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Zhao, M.; Jia, Q.; Li, C. Examining the Interaction Between Perceived Neighborhood Disorder, Positive Peers, and Self-Esteem on Adolescent Prosocial Behavior: A Study of Chinese Adolescents. Behav. Sci. 2025, 15, 1146. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Ju, E.; Qi, H.; Zhao, L.; Luo, Y.; Li, Y.; You, X. The longitudinal relationship between adolescents’ prosocial behavior and well-being: A cross-lagged panel network analysis. J. Youth Adolesc. 2025, 54, 1428–1441. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Memmott-Elison, M.K.; Holmgren, H.G.; Padilla-Walker, L.M.; Hawkins, A.J. Associations between prosocial behavior, externalizing behaviors, and internalizing symptoms during adolescence: A meta-analysis. J. Adolesc. 2020, 80, 98–114. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Zahn-Waxler, C.; Shirtcliff, E.A.; Marceau, K. Disorders of childhood and adolescence: Gender and psychopathology. Annu. Rev. Clin. Psychol. 2008, 4, 275–303. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Hyde, J.S.; Mezulis, A.H.; Abramson, L.Y. The ABCs of depression: Integrating affective, biological, and cognitive models to explain the emergence of the gender difference in depression. Psychol. Rev. 2008, 115, 291–313. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Puntoni, M.; Esposito, S.; Patrizi, L.; Palo, C.M.; Deolmi, M.; Autore, G.; Fainardi, V.; Caminiti, C.; On Behalf of the University Hospital of Parma Long-Covid Research Team. Impact of Age and Sex Interaction on Post-Acute Sequelae of COVID-19: An Italian Cohort Study on Adults and Children. J. Clin. Med. 2023, 12, 2924. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Nolen-Hoeksema, S.; Girgus, J.S. The emergence of gender differences in depression during adolescence. Psychol. Bull. 1994, 115, 424–443. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Rose, A.J.; Rudolph, K.D. A review of sex differences in peer relationship processes: Potential trade-offs for the emotional and behavioral development of girls and boys. Psychol. Bull. 2006, 132, 98–131. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Shek, D.T.; Ma, H.K. Parent-adolescent conflict and adolescent antisocial and prosocial behavior: A longitudinal study in a Chinese context. Adolescence 2001, 36, 545–555. [Google Scholar]
  64. Resnick, M.D.; Bearman, P.S.; Blum, R.W.; Bauman, K.E.; Harris, K.M.; Jones, J.; Tabor, J.; Beuhring, T.; Sieving, R.E.; Shew, M.; et al. Protecting adolescents from harm: Findings from the National Longitudinal Study on Adolescent Health. JAMA 1997, 278, 823–832. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Varela, C.; Hoyo, Á.; Tapia-Sanz, M.E.; Jiménez-González, A.I.; Moral, B.J.; Rodríguez-Fernández, P.; Vargas-Hernández, Y.; Ruiz-Sánchez, L.J. An update on the underlying risk factors of eating disorders onset during adolescence: A systematic review. Front. Psychol. 2023, 14, 1221679. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. McCord, A.; Rock, A.J.; Davies, R.; Rice, K. Psychometric evaluation of the ‘Caregiver Factors Influencing Treatment’ (Care-FIT) Inventory for child and adolescent eating disorders. J. Eat. Disord. 2025, 13, 208. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Goodman, R.; Ford, T.; Simmons, H.; Gatward, R.; Meltzer, H. Using the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) to screen for child psychiatric disorders in a community sample. Br. J. Psychiatry 2000, 177, 534–539. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Allen, J.P.; Antonishak, J. Adolescent peer influences: Beyond the dark side. In Understanding Peer Influence in Children and Adolescents; Prinstein, M.J., Dodge, K.A., Eds.; Guilford Press: New York, NY, USA, 2008; pp. 141–160. [Google Scholar]
  69. Catalano, R.F.; Berglund, M.L.; Ryan, J.A.M.; Lonczak, H.S.; Hawkins, J.D. Positive youth development in the United States: Research findings on evaluations of positive youth development programs. Ann. Am. Acad. Pol. Soc. Sci. 2004, 591, 98–124. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Oberle, E.; Schonert-Reichl, K.A.; Thomson, K.C. Understanding the link between social and emotional well-being and peer relations in early adolescence: Gender-specific predictors of peer acceptance. J. Youth Adolesc. 2010, 39, 1330–1342. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Nesi, J.; Choukas-Bradley, S.; Prinstein, M.J. Transformation of adolescent peer relations in the social media context: Part 1—A theoretical framework and application to dyadic peer relationships. Clin. Child Fam. Psychol. Rev. 2018, 21, 267–294. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Jcm 14 07177 g001
Figure 1. Standardized coefficients (β) with 95% BCa CI from OLS and robust MM models predicting SDQ Total Difficulties (SDQ TD). Note. Standardized coefficients (β) with 95% BCa confidence intervals (bootstrap, R = 5000) from OLS (red) and robust MM (blue) regression models predicting SDQ Total Difficulties. Filled symbols indicate BH-adjusted p < 0.05; open symbols indicate non-significant predictors. Reference lines shown at β = 0 (dashed) and ±0.25 (solid). Negative values indicate protective effects; positive values indicate risk.
Figure 1. Standardized coefficients (β) with 95% BCa CI from OLS and robust MM models predicting SDQ Total Difficulties (SDQ TD). Note. Standardized coefficients (β) with 95% BCa confidence intervals (bootstrap, R = 5000) from OLS (red) and robust MM (blue) regression models predicting SDQ Total Difficulties. Filled symbols indicate BH-adjusted p < 0.05; open symbols indicate non-significant predictors. Reference lines shown at β = 0 (dashed) and ±0.25 (solid). Negative values indicate protective effects; positive values indicate risk.
Jcm 14 07177 g001
Table 1. Descriptive statistics for adolescents attending a pediatric clinic (N = 177).
Table 1. Descriptive statistics for adolescents attending a pediatric clinic (N = 177).
VariableMSD
Continuous variables
Age (years)12.511.11
SDQ Total Difficulties10.625.46
Prosocial behavior (SDQ)7.621.99
Mother-relationship satisfaction4.370.83
Father-relationship satisfaction4.210.96
Friendship satisfaction4.220.88
Categorical variablesn%
Sex (Female)7743.5
Italian citizenship (Yes)16593.2
Chronic condition (Yes)12771.8
Eating-disorder risk (SCOFF ≥ 3)4123.2
Alcohol use, lifetime (Yes)3519.8
Alcohol use, past year (Yes)2413.6
Alcohol use, past 30 days (Yes)169.0
Nicotine use, lifetime (Yes)1810.2
Nicotine use, past year (Yes)147.9
Nicotine use, past 30 days (Yes)137.4
Cannabis use, lifetime (Yes)31.7
Cannabis use, past year (Yes)21.1
Cannabis use, past 30 days (Yes)21.1
Note. SD = standard deviation; SDQ = Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire. Percentages computed on total sample (N = 177).
Table 2. Ordinary least-squares (OLS) predictors of SDQ TD in adolescents attending a pediatric clinic.
Table 2. Ordinary least-squares (OLS) predictors of SDQ TD in adolescents attending a pediatric clinic.
PredictorB(SE)95% CIpBHβΔ a
Intercept34.24(5.24)[23.73, 44.21]———
Age−0.39(0.34)[−1.03, 0.33]0.362−0.080.28
Sex2.30(0.70)[0.91, 3.70]0.0020.210.14
Chronic condition −0.16(0.68)[−1.45, 1.21]0.788−0.020.33
Italian citizenship 0.43(1.00)[−1.77, 2.18]0.7880.020.17
Mother-relationship satisfaction −0.68(0.56)[−1.61, 0.61]0.362−0.100.20
Father-relationship satisfaction −1.00(0.47)[−1.87, −0.03]0.054−0.180.11
Friendship satisfaction −2.05(0.35)[−2.71, −1.31]<0.001−0.330.04
Eating-disorder risk 1.39(0.87)[−0.35, 3.04]0.2100.110.06
Prosocial behavior score −0.64(0.20)[−1.04,−0.27]0.006−0.230.07
Alcohol use (30 d) 0.45(1.46)[−2.24, 3.56]0.7880.020.01
Nicotine use (30 d) 2.29(1.61)[−0.77, 5.55]0.2980.110.73
Model fit: R2 = 0.41, adj. R2 = 0.37; F(11, 165) = 10.49, p < 0.001.
Note. B(SE) = unstandardized coefficient with bootstrap SE; 95% CI = BCa pairs-bootstrap; pBH = Benjamini–Hochberg-adjusted bootstrap p-value (two-sided), across 11 predictors; intercept excluded; β = standardized OLS coefficient; Δ = Brobust − BOLS; Sex (female): coded 1 = female, 0 = male; ᵃ Predictors with |Δ| ≤ 0.10 were deemed stable to outlier down-weighting. Significant p values are reported in bold.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Tadonio, L.; Giudice, A.; Infantino, C.; Pilloni, S.; Verdesca, M.; Patianna, V.; Gerra, G.; Esposito, S. Peer Relationships and Psychosocial Difficulties in Adolescents: Evidence from a Clinical Pediatric Sample. J. Clin. Med. 2025, 14, 7177. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm14207177

AMA Style

Tadonio L, Giudice A, Infantino C, Pilloni S, Verdesca M, Patianna V, Gerra G, Esposito S. Peer Relationships and Psychosocial Difficulties in Adolescents: Evidence from a Clinical Pediatric Sample. Journal of Clinical Medicine. 2025; 14(20):7177. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm14207177

Chicago/Turabian Style

Tadonio, Leonardo, Antonella Giudice, Claudia Infantino, Simone Pilloni, Matteo Verdesca, Viviana Patianna, Gilberto Gerra, and Susanna Esposito. 2025. "Peer Relationships and Psychosocial Difficulties in Adolescents: Evidence from a Clinical Pediatric Sample" Journal of Clinical Medicine 14, no. 20: 7177. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm14207177

APA Style

Tadonio, L., Giudice, A., Infantino, C., Pilloni, S., Verdesca, M., Patianna, V., Gerra, G., & Esposito, S. (2025). Peer Relationships and Psychosocial Difficulties in Adolescents: Evidence from a Clinical Pediatric Sample. Journal of Clinical Medicine, 14(20), 7177. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm14207177

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop