Felipe Agudelo-Hernández

Background: Adolescents’ access to mental health care depends partly on their ability to recognize when rights related to emotional distress, confidentiality, participation, non-discrimination, continuity of care, and support are respected or violated. This study developed and evaluated the Know and Act Scale , a vignette-based instrument designed to assess situated recognition of mental health-related human rights among Colombian adolescents. Methods: An instrumental, cross-sectional psychometric study was conducted in urban, semi-urban, and rural educational contexts in Colombia. Scale development included theoretical construction, Delphi expert consensus, cognitive interviews, exploratory factor analysis, confirmatory factor analysis, and ll consistency testing. The exploratory sample included 860 adolescents, and the confirmatory sample included 145 adolescents. Results: Exploratory factor analysis supported a three-domain structure: Right to Feel, Right to Participate, and Right to Be Helped, which explained 73.06% of the variance. Internal consistency was good for the overall scale (α = .869; ω = .894). Confirmatory factor analysis showed adequate comparative fit, supporting the proposed structure in an independent sample. Conclusions: The Know and Act Scale offers a theoretically grounded and psychometrically supported tool for assessing adolescents’ situated recognition of mental health-related human rights. It may support research, school-based mental health promotion, and rights-informed care in adolescent populations.

Objectives: This study aimed to identify psychosocial profiles among Colombian adolescents living in environmentally transformed territories and to examine whether solastalgia was associated with profile membership and territorial variation. Design: A cross‐sectional, person‐centred analytical study was conducted with school‐attending adolescents from four Colombian contexts affected by urban construction‐related change, agricultural transformation, extractive activity, and Indigenous displacement. Methods: The sample included 1064 adolescents. Four standardized domains were constructed: well‐being capacities, school health, symptom and clinical‐risk burden, and protective family‐system functioning. Solastalgia was introduced as an external predictor rather than as a profile indicator. Latent profile analysis identified psychosocial profiles, and multinomial models examined the association between solastalgia and profile membership. Territorial profile differences and BSS × territory patterns were examined descriptively. Results: A five‐profile solution was retained: Contextually Flourishing, 25.7%; Supported Low‐Capacity, 18.0%; School‐Strained Resourced, 25.0%; Family‐Strained Distress, 27.0%; and Multisystem Vulnerability, 4.3%. Higher solastalgia was most clearly associated with Family‐Strained Distress relative to Contextually Flourishing, RRR = 1.25, 95% CI [1.05, 1.49], p = .011. Profile distribution differed by territory, χ ² (12) = 437.64, p < .001, Cramér's V = .37, whereas territorial moderation remained exploratory because of sparse profile‐territory combinations. Conclusions: Solastalgia was not a general marker of psychosocial risk. Its clinical significance was most evident when environmental suffering co‐occurred with elevated symptoms and weaker family‐system protection. Adolescent environmental distress should be assessed through ecological, person‐centred formulations that integrate symptoms, family containment, school experience, and preserved resources.

Poly-victimization, armed conflict, and structural inequality shape the conditions in which adolescents come to understand justice, rights, and institutional protection. This qualitative case study explored how youths enrolled in the Juvenile Criminal Responsibility System in Chocó, Colombia, understand justice, rights, and experiences of injustice across their life course. Semi-structured interviews were conducted. Reflexive thematic analysis generated one superordinate theme, Justice as an Individual and Unfulfilled Experience , and three interrelated subthemes: Justice in the First Person , where justice was understood mainly through individual behavior, rule compliance, and punishment, Justice That Does Not Exist , reflecting perceptions of institutional ineffectiveness, and Rights Are Written , where rights were recognized as formal legal principles but rarely experienced as guaranteed in everyday life. Limited social justice literacy reflects trajectories marked by punishment and unmet protection needs. Juvenile justice programs should move beyond individualized correction by creating rights-based, restorative, and trauma-informed spaces that connect accountability with dignity.

Background: Polycrisis refers to interacting social, economic, environmental, institutional, cultural, political, and health‐system crises that amplify one another. In Indigenous children and adolescents, dermatological diseases may indicate not only a clinical skin condition but also overlapping vulnerabilities involving housing, water and sanitation, nutrition, environmental exposure, territorial disruption, discrimination, and barriers to culturally safe care. Aims: To map evidence on how polycrisis is related to dermatological diseases among Indigenous children and adolescents, and to describe the dermatological conditions most frequently reported in these populations. Methods: This scoping review considered records published between 2010 and 2025, without language restrictions. Eligible records included quantitative, qualitative, review, perspective, editorial, secondary‐analysis, and gray‐literature sources when they addressed dermatological disease in Indigenous children or adolescents and overlapping crisis‐related determinants. The review followed Joanna Briggs Institute guidance and PRISMA‐ScR reporting standards. Results: Eight studies were included. The evidence does not establish causality, but it maps recurrent pathways through which environmental exposure, poverty, overcrowding, limited water and sanitation, geographic isolation, fragmented services, cultural safety barriers, stigma, and under‐documentation converge with pediatric skin disease. Atopic dermatitis/eczema and infectious dermatoses, including bacterial skin infections, scabies, fungal infections, and pediculosis, were the most frequent categories. Conclusions: Pediatric skin health in Indigenous communities should be understood as a clinical and public health indicator of intersecting environmental, socioeconomic, institutional, cultural, and political crises. Dermatological care in these settings requires accurate diagnosis and treatment, but also intercultural, rights‐based, and social‐determinants‐informed responses.