Search

Background: It is well known that the COVID-19 pandemic has caused a global health crisis, especially for young people. However, most studies were conducted during the first waves of the pandemic. Few Italian studies specifically attempted to broadly assess young people's mental health status during the fourth wave of the pandemic. Methods: This study aimed at evaluating the mental health status among a group of Italian adolescents and young adults during the fourth wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. 11,839 high school students and 15,000 university students (age range 14–25) were asked to complete a multidimensional online survey, of which 7,146 (26,6%) agreed to participate. The survey also included standardized measures for depression, anxiety, anger, somatic symptoms, resilience, loneliness and post-traumatic growth. Two separate clusters were identified through cluster analysis. Random forest, classification tree and logistic regressions analyses were applied to identify factors associated to a good or a poor level of mental health and, thus, to define students' mental health profiles. Results: Overall, the students in our sample showed high levels of psychopathology. The clustering methods performed identified two separate clusters reflecting groups of students with different psychological features, that we further defined as "poor mental health" and "good mental health". The random forest and the logistic regressions found that the most discriminating variables among those two groups were: UCLA Loneliness Scale score, self-harm behaviors, Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale-10 score, satisfaction with family relationships, Fear of COVID-19 Scale score, gender and binge eating behaviors. The classification tree analysis identified students' profiles, showing that, globally, poor mental health was defined by higher scores of loneliness and self-harm, followed by being of female gender, presenting binge eating behaviors and, finally, having unsatisfying family relationships. Conclusions: The results of this study confirmed the major psychological distress caused by the COVID-19 pandemic in a large sample of Italian students, and provided further insights regarding those factors associated with a good or poor mental health status. Our findings suggest the importance of implementing programs targeting aspects that have been found to be associated to a good mental health. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: No study has so far explored differences in discrimination reported by people with major depressive disorder (MDD) across countries and cultures.Aims: To (a) compare reported discrimination across different countries, and (b) explore the relative weight of individual and contextual factors in explaining levels of reported discrimination in people with MDD.Method: Cross-sectional multisite international survey (34 countries worldwide) of 1082 people with MDD. Experienced and anticipated discrimination were assessed by the Discrimination and Stigma Scale (DISC). Countries were classified according to their rating on the Human Development Index (HDI). Multilevel negative binomial and Poisson models were used.Results: People living in 'very high HDI' countries reported higher discrimination than those in 'medium/low HDI' countries. Variation in reported discrimination across countries was only partially explained by individual-level variables. The contribution of country-level variables was significant for anticipated discrimination only.Conclusions: Contextual factors play an important role in anticipated discrimination. Country-specific interventions should be implemented to prevent discrimination towards people with MDD. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Social capital is a protective factor for mental health. People with depression are vulnerable to discrimination and its damaging impact. No previous studies have explored the link between social capital and experienced or anticipated discrimination in people with depression. This study aims to test the hypothesis that levels of self-reported discrimination in people with depression are inversely associated with social capital levels. Method: A total of 434 people with major depression recruited in outpatient settings across 15 European countries participated in the study. Multivariable regression was used to analyse relationships between discrimination and interpersonal and institutional trust, social support and social network. Results: Significant inverse association was found between discrimination and social capital in people with major depression. Specifically, people with higher levels of social capital were less likely to have elevated or substantially elevated levels of experienced discrimination. Conclusions: Higher level of social capital may be closely associated with lower level of experienced discrimination among patients with major depression. It is important to explore these associations more deeply and to establish possible directions of causality in order to identify interventions that may promote social capital and reduce discrimination. This may permit greater integration in society and more access to important life opportunities for people with depression. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Stigma associated with depression is a major public health issue in the EU, with over 20 million people experiencing depression and its associated personal distress each year. While most programmes against stigma related to mental health problems are of a general nature, the knowledge about programmes tackling stigma against people with depression is limited. This study therefore aims to assess the nature and impact of depression-specific programmes in EU countries. Using a web-based tool, 26 programmes were identified across the 18 EU countries taking part in the study. Most were universal and targeted the whole population, while many also targeted specific population groups or settings, such as young people or health professionals. The most common programme aim was improving literacy, although reducing stigmatizing attitudes and discriminatory behaviour and promoting help-seeking were also common. Most programmes originated from professional bodies, or as grassroots initiatives from service user groups/NGOs, rather than as part of national and local policy. The approaches used were primarily different forms of education/information, with some, but very limited, use of positive personal contact. Overall, the quality and extent of impact of the programmes was limited, with few leading to peer-reviewed publications. Specific programmes were identified with evidence of positive impact, and we drew on these examples to develop a framework to be used for future programmes against stigma and discrimination associated with depression. These findings are provided in full in the Anti-Stigma Partnership European Network Toolkit available at www.antistigma.eu. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents the cross-sectional survey which determined the global pattern of experienced and anticipated discrimination reported by individuals with major depressive disorder. It examines whether experienced discrimination is linked to clinical history, provision of health care, and disclosure of diagnosis. It cites that depression is the third major contributor to the worldwide burden of disease.