Search

The excess mortality observed in people with severe mental disorders (SMD) has not improved over time and is not captured in estimates of disease burden. This study aimed to improve upon previous analytic approaches to account for potential sources of heterogeneity in pooled mortality estimates. A systematic review of studies examining excess mortality in people with psychotic disorders and bipolar disorder was conducted. PubMed, EMBASE and PsycINFO were searched from January 1, 1980 to 31/12/20. Studies were eligible if they were longitudinal; the study population was diagnosed according to established criteria, not restricted to subgroups and the disorder was primary and not acute or transient; and mortality was reported in comparison to the general population or a control group without SMD. Meta-regression models were used to calculate pooled relative risks (RRs) of all-cause and cause-specific mortality adjusted for study- and population-level covariates. Risk of bias was assessed using an adaptation of the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. A total of 76 studies were included in the analyses. Covariates incorporated into the final models included age, sex, population type and mid-year. The adjusted RR for all-cause mortality in schizophrenia was 2.89 (95% CI 2.50 to 3.34) and 2.51 (95%CI 2.10 to 3.00) for bipolar disorder. There were larger RRs for broader categories of psychotic disorders. Mortality was elevated in each cause of death examined. Most of the heterogeneity between studies could not be accounted for. Future research should investigate underlying causal pathways and find ways to incorporate the excess mortality associated with SMD into global health estimates. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Compared with other health areas, the mental health impacts of climate change have received less research attention. The literature on climate change and mental health is growing rapidly but is characterised by several limitations and research gaps. In a field where the need for designing evidence-based adaptation strategies is urgent, and research gaps are vast, implementing a broad, all-encompassing research agenda will require some strategic focus. We followed a structured approach to prioritise future climate change and mental health research. We consulted with experts working across mental health and climate change, both within and outside of research and working in high, middle, and low-income countries, to garner consensus about the future research priorities for mental health and climate change. Experts were identified based on whether they had published work on climate change and mental health, worked in governmental and non-governmental organisations on climate change and mental health, and from the professional networks of the authors who have been active in the mental health and climate change space. Twenty-two experts participated from across low- and middle-income countries (n = 4) and high-income countries (n = 18). Our process identified ten key priorities for progressing research on mental health and climate change. While climate change is considered the biggest threat to global mental health in the coming century, tackling this threat could be the most significant opportunity to shape our mental health for centuries to come because of health co-benefits of transitioning to more sustainable ways of living. Research on the impacts of climate change on mental health and mental health-related systems will assist decision-makers to develop robust evidence-based mitigation and adaptation policies and plans with the potential for broad benefits to society and the environment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]