Search

Abstract Background The COVID-19 pandemic has captured the mental health discussion worldwide. Examining countries' representation in this discussion could prove instrumental in identifying potential gaps in terms of ensuring a truly global conversation in times of global crisis. Methods We collected mental health and COVID-19-related journal articles published in PubMed in 2020. We focused on the corresponding authors' countries of affiliation to explore countries' representation. We also examined these articles' academic impact and correlations with their corresponding authors' countries of affiliation. Additional journals and countries' indicators were collected from the Web of Science and World Bank websites, respectively. Data were analyzed using the IBM SPSS Statistics and the VOSviewer software. Results In total, 3492 publications were analyzed. Based on the corresponding author, high-income countries produced 61.9% of these publications. Corresponding authors from Africa, Latin America and the Caribbean, and the Middle East combined accounted for 11.8% of the publications. Europe hosted corresponding authors with the most publications and citations, and corresponding authors from North America had the largest mean journal impact factor. Conclusions The global scientific discussion during the COVID-19 pandemic saw an increased contribution of academics from developing countries. However, authors from high-income countries have continued to shape this discussion. It is imperative to ensure the active participation of low- and middle-income countries in setting up the global mental health research agenda, particularly in situations of global crisis, such as the ongoing pandemic.

Abstract. Background: The COVID-19 pandemic is a massive health crisis that has exerted enormous physical and psychological pressure. Mental healthcare for healthcare workers (HCWs) should receive serious consideration. This study served to determine the mental-health outcomes of 1,556 HCWs from 45 countries who participated in the COVID-19 IMPACT project, and to examine the predictors of the outcomes during the first pandemic wave. Methods: Outcomes assessed were self-reported perceived stress, depression symptom, and sleep changes. The predictors examined included sociodemographic factors and perceived social support. Results: The results demonstrated that half of the HCWs had moderate levels of perceived stress and symptoms of depression. Half of the HCWs (n = 800, 51.4%) had similar sleeping patterns since the pandemic started, and one in four slept more or slept less. HCWs reported less perceived stress and depression symptoms and higher levels of perceived social support than the general population who participated in the same project. Predictors associated with higher perceived stress and symptoms of depression among HCWs included female sex, not having children, living with parents, lower educational level, and lower social support. Discussion: The need for establishing ways to mitigate mental-health risks and adjusting psychological interventions and support for HCWs seems to be significant as the pandemic continues.

Sense of coherence (SOC) is a relevant contributor and predictor of the individuals' mental and physical health. There are a number of studies about SOC, but only two validation articles of the sense of coherence scale (SOCS) were found on adolescents and none on children. The aim of this research was to validate the SOC scale in youth under 18. We hypothesized that younger children and children without psychiatric problems will have higher SOC than older ones, and children with psychiatric symptoms. We also wanted to examine the factor structure of both the 13 and the 29 item versions of the scale to study which is more valid in child and adolescent population. 199 children and 198 adolescents were included in the study; the mean age was 14.3 (SD 2.1) years. The sample included average youth from schools and youth under psychiatric treatment. Strength and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) and Inventory of Life Quality (ILK) were used for validation of the SOCS. SOCS-13 was applied to compare SOC of children and adolescents. Children had higher SOC than adolescents in both samples. Males had higher SOC than females in children but not in adolescents. Psychiatric and behavioral symptoms were associated with a lower SOC regardless

Suicide is a global health issue that needs to be addressed. The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in an increased mental health burden. Stigma has obstructed efforts to prevent suicide as individuals who need urgent support do not seek appropriate help. The influence of stigma is likely to grow in tandem with the COVID-19 pandemic. The stigmatization of persons with mental illnesses is widespread worldwide, and it has substantial effects on both the individual and society. Our viewpoints aim to address the probable link between stigma and suicide in the wake of the current pandemic and propose ideas for reducing suicide-related stigma.

The coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic fundamentally disrupted humans’ social life and behavior. Public health measures may have inadvertently impacted how people care for each other. This study investigated prosocial behavior, its association well-being, and predictors of prosocial behavior during the first COVID-19 pandemic lockdown and sought to understand whether region-specific differences exist. Participants (N = 9,496) from eight regions clustering multiple countries around the world responded to a cross-sectional online-survey investigating the psychological consequences of the first upsurge of lockdowns in spring 2020. Prosocial behavior was reported to occur frequently. Multiple regression analyses showed that prosocial behavior was associated with better well-being consistently across regions. With regard to predictors of prosocial behavior, high levels of perceived social support were most strongly associated with prosocial behavior, followed by high levels of perceived stress, positive affect and psychological flexibility. Sociodemographic and psychosocial predictors of prosocial behavior were similar across regions.

Objective: Illness perceptions (IP) are important predictors of emotional and behavioral responses in many diseases. The current study aims to investigate the COVID-19-related IP throughout Europe. The specific goals are to understand the temporal development, identify predictors (within demographics and contact with COVID-19) and examine the impacts of IP on perceived stress and preventive behaviors.Methods: This was a time-series-cross-section study of 7,032 participants from 16 European countries using multilevel modeling from April to June 2020. IP were measured with the Brief Illness Perception Questionnaire. Temporal patterns were observed considering the date of participation and the date recoded to account the epidemiological evolution of each country. The outcomes considered were perceived stress and COVID-19 preventive behaviors.Results: There were significant trends, over time, for several IP, suggesting a small decrease in negativity in the perception of COVID-19 in the community. Age, gender, and education level related to some, but not all, IP. Considering the self-regulation model, perceptions consistently predicted general stress and were less consistently related to preventive behaviors. Country showed no effect in the predictive model, suggesting that national differences may have little relevance for IP, in this context.Conclusion: The present study provides a comprehensive picture of COVID-19 IP in Europe in an early stage of the pandemic. The results shed light on the process of IP formation with implications for health-related outcomes and their evolution.

BackgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic triggered vast governmental lockdowns. The impact of these lockdowns on mental health is inadequately understood. On the one hand such drastic changes in daily routines could be detrimental to mental health. On the other hand, it might not be experienced negatively, especially because the entire population was affected.MethodsThe aim of this study was to determine mental health outcomes during pandemic induced lockdowns and to examine known predictors of mental health outcomes. We therefore surveyed n = 9,565 people from 78 countries and 18 languages. Outcomes assessed were stress, depression, affect, and wellbeing. Predictors included country, sociodemographic factors, lockdown characteristics, social factors, and psychological factors.ResultsResults indicated that on average about 10% of the sample was languishing from low levels of mental health and about 50% had only moderate mental health. Importantly, three consistent predictors of mental health emerged: social support, education level, and psychologically flexible (vs. rigid) responding. Poorer outcomes were most strongly predicted by a worsening of finances and not having access to basic supplies.ConclusionsThese results suggest that on whole, respondents were moderately mentally healthy at the time of a population-wide lockdown. The highest level of mental health difficulties were found in approximately 10% of the population. Findings suggest that public health initiatives should target people without social support and those whose finances worsen as a result of the lockdown. Interventions that promote psychological flexibility may mitigate the impact of the pandemic.

Background: The coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic, caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), has detrimental effects on physical and mental health. Patients with severe mental illness are at higher risk of contracting the virus due to social determinants of health. Vulnerable populations include the elderly, people with pre-existing conditions, and those exposed to SARS-CoV-2. Unfortunately, only a few countries have updated vaccination strategies to prioritize patients with mental illnesses. Therefore, we aimed to explore whether individuals with mental disorders are prioritized in vaccine allocation strategies in different world regions. They are often neglected in policymaking but are highly vulnerable to the threatening complications of COVID-19. Methods: A questionnaire was developed to record details regarding COVID-19 vaccination and prioritizations for groups of persons with non-communicable diseases (NCDs), mental disorders, and substance use disorders (SUDs). NCDs were defined according to the WHO as chronic diseases that are the result of a combination of genetic, physiological, environmental, and behavioral factors such as cardiovascular diseases, cancer, respiratory diseases, and diabetes. Results: Most countries surveyed (80%) reported healthcare delivery via a nationalized health service. It was found that 82% of the countries had set up advisory groups, but only 26% included a mental health professional. Most frequently, malignancy (68%) was prioritized followed by diabetes type 2 (62%) and type 1 (59%). Only nine countries (26%) prioritized mental health conditions. Conclusion: The spread of the coronavirus has exposed both the strengths and flaws of our healthcare systems. The most vulnerable groups suffered the most and were hit first and faced most challenges. These findings raise awareness that patients with mental illnesses have been overlooked in immunization campaigns. The range of their mortality, morbidity, and quality of life could have widened due to this delay.

Summary: Background: Mental health-related stigma occurs among the public and professionals alike. The lived experience of mental illness has been linked to less stigmatising attitudes. However, data on psychiatrists and the relationship between stigmatising attitudes and psychotherapeutic activity or case discussion groups remains scarce. Methods: A cross-sectional multicentre study was performed in 32 European countries to investigate the lived experiences and attitudes of psychiatrists toward patients with mental illness as well as the relationship between stigma, psychosocial and professional factors. The self-reported, anonymous, internet-based Opening Minds Stigma Scale for Health Care Providers was used to measure the stigmatising attitudes. The survey was translated into the local language of each participating country. All participants were practising specialists and trainees in general adult or child and adolescent psychiatry. The study took place between 2nd October, 2019 and 9th July, 2021 and was preregistered at ClinicalTrial.gov (NCT04644978). Findings: A total of 4245 psychiatrists completed the survey. The majority, 2797 (66%), had completed training in psychiatry, and 3320 (78%) worked in adult psychiatry. The final regression model showed that across European countries more favourable attitudes toward people with mental illness were statistically significantly associated with the lived experience of participants (including seeking help for their own mental health conditions (d = −0.92, 95% confidence interval (CI) = −1.68 to −0.15, p = 0.019), receiving medical treatment for a mental illness (d = −0.88, 95% CI = −1.71 to −0.04, p = 0.040), as well as having a friend or a family member similarly affected (d = −0.68, 95% CI = −1.14 to −0.22, p = 0.004)), being surrounded by colleagues who are less stigmatising (d = −0.98, 95% CI = −1.26 to −0.70, p

Abstract Background Identifying common factors that affect public adherence to COVID-19 containment measures can directly inform the development of official public health communication strategies. The present international longitudinal study aimed to examine whether prosociality, together with other theoretically derived motivating factors (self-efficacy, perceived susceptibility and severity of COVID-19, perceived social support) predict the change in adherence to COVID-19 containment strategies. Method In wave 1 of data collection, adults from eight geographical regions completed online surveys beginning in April 2020, and wave 2 began in June and ended in September 2020. Hypothesized predictors included prosociality, self-efficacy in following COVID-19 containment measures, perceived susceptibility to COVID-19, perceived severity of COVID-19 and perceived social support. Baseline covariates included age, sex, history of COVID-19 infection and geographical regions. Participants who reported adhering to specific containment measures, including physical distancing, avoidance of non-essential travel and hand hygiene, were classified as adherence. The dependent variable was the category of adherence, which was constructed based on changes in adherence across the survey period and included four categories: non-adherence, less adherence, greater adherence and sustained adherence (which was designated as the reference category). Results In total, 2189 adult participants (82% female, 57.2% aged 31–59 years) from East Asia (217 [9.7%]), West Asia (246 [11.2%]), North and South America (131 [6.0%]), Northern Europe (600 [27.4%]), Western Europe (322 [14.7%]), Southern Europe (433 [19.8%]), Eastern Europe (148 [6.8%]) and other regions (96 [4.4%]) were analyzed. Adjusted multinomial logistic regression analyses showed that prosociality, self-efficacy, perceived susceptibility and severity of COVID-19 were significant factors affecting adherence. Participants with greater self-efficacy at wave 1 were less likely to become non-adherence at wave 2 by 26% (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.74; 95% CI, 0.71 to 0.77; P

Climate change poses significant challenges to global mental health, with potential consequences including increased rates of suicide and mental health disorders. Early Career Psychiatrists (ECPs) play a crucial role in addressing these challenges. The Climate Psychiatry Alliance, a group of psychiatrists dedicated to improving mental health amidst climate change, recognizes the importance of cultivating climate-aware ECPs. Training ECPs to become confident climate-aware clinicians enables them to effectively treat patients experiencing anxiety, depression, and PTSD in the context of climate-related distress. Together with other mental health professionals, ECPs can contribute to efforts by implementing strategies for monitoring and treating mental health problems arising from climate events. Additionally, they can raise awareness about the psychological consequences and risks of suicide associated with climate change. Collaboration among ECPs from various regions is essential in developing community-based approaches and reducing vulnerabilities. ECPs must prioritize supporting vulnerable populations by advocating for increased funding for mental health support and research in affected areas. Long-term solutions to address the mental health impacts of climate change and global warming should be pursued to mitigate future suicidality. Integrating climate considerations into local mental health programs and expanding psychological support services is crucial. By promoting emotional resilience and self-awareness, ECPs can contribute to building a more climate-resilient and mentally healthy society.

AimsTo measure the stigma of healthcare providers toward people suffering from mental illness, the Opening Minds Stigma Scale for Health Care Providers (OMS-HC) is a commonly applied instrument. However, this scale has not been thoroughly validated in many European countries, its psychometric properties are still unknown and data on practicing psychiatrists is lacking. Therefore, this multicenter study aimed to assess the psychometric characteristics of the 15-item OMS-HC in trainees and specialists in adult and child psychiatry in 32 countries across Europe.Materials and methodsThe OMS-HC was conducted as an anonymous online survey and sent via Email to European adult and child psychiatrists. Parallel analysis was used to estimate the number of OMS-HC dimensions. Separate for each country, the bifactor ESEM, a bifactor exploratory structural equation modeling approach, was applied to investigate the factor structure of the scale. Cross-cultural validation was done based on multigroup confirmatory factor analyses and reliability measures.ResultsA total of 4,245 practitioners were included, 2,826 (67%) female, 1,389 (33%) male. The majority (66%) of participants were specialists, with 78% working in adult psychiatry. When country data were analyzed separately, the bifactor model (higher-order factor solution with a general factor and three specific factors) showed the best model fit (for the total sample χ2/df = 9.760, RMSEA = 0.045 (0.042–0.049), CFI = 0.981; TLI = 0.960, WRMR = 1.200). The average proportion of variance explained by the general factor was high (ECV = 0.682). This suggests that the aspects of ‘attitude,’ ‘disclosure and help-seeking,’ and ‘social distance’ could be treated as a single dimension of stigma. Among the specific factors, the ‘disclosure and help-seeking’ factor explained a considerable unique proportion of variance in the observed scores.ConclusionThis international study has led to cross-cultural analysis of the OMS-HC on a large sample of practicing psychiatrists. The bifactor structure displayed the best overall model fit in each country. Rather than using the subscales, we recommend the total score to quantify the overall stigmatizing attitudes. Further studies are required to strengthen our findings in countries where the proposed model was found to be weak.

Abstract Background The Opening Minds Stigma Scale for Health Care Providers (OMS-HC) is a widely used questionnaire to measure the stigmatising attitudes of healthcare providers towards patients with mental health problems. The psychometric properties of the scale; however, have never been investigated in Hungary. We aimed to thoroughly explore the factor structure of the OMS-HC and examine the key psychometric properties of the Hungarian version. Methods The OMS-HC is a self-report questionnaire that measures the overall stigmatising attitude by a total score, and three subscales can be calculated: Attitude, Disclosure and Help-seeking, and Social Distance. Our study population included specialists and trainees in adult and child psychiatry (n = 211). Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses were performed, and higher-order factors were tested. We calculated the test-retest reliability on a subgroup of our sample (n = 31) with a follow-up period of 1 month. The concurrent validity of the scale was measured with the Mental Illness: Clinician’s Attitudes-4 scale (MICA-4). Results Three factors were extracted based on a parallel-analysis. A bifactor solution (a general factor and three specific factors) showed an excellent model-fit (root mean square error of approximation = 0.025, comparative fit index = 0.961, and Tucker-Lewis index = 0.944). The model-based reliability was low; however, the general factor showed acceptable reliability (coefficient omega hierarchical = 0.56). The scale demonstrated a good concurrent validity with the MICA-4 [intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) = 0.77]. The test-retest reliability was excellent for the general factor (ICC = 0.95) and good for the specific factors (ICC = 0.90, 0.88, and 0.84, respectively). Conclusions The three dimensions of the OMS-HC was confirmed, and the scale was found to be an adequate measure of the stigmatising attitude in Hungary. The bifactor model is more favourable as compared to the three correlated factor model; however, despite the excellent internal structure, its model-based reliability was low.

ObjectiveStigma towards people with mental health problems is a growing issue across the world, to which healthcare providers might contribute. The aim of the present study was to explore psychiatrists' attitudes towards their patients and link them to psychosocial and professional factors.MethodsAn online questionnaire was used to approach the in- and outpatient psychiatric services across Hungary. A total of 211 trainees and specialists in adult and child psychiatry participated in our study. Their overall stigmatizing attitudes were measured, with focus on attitude, disclosure and help-seeking, and social distance dimensions by using the self-report Opening Minds Stigma Scale for Health Care Providers (OMS-HC). Multiple linear regression analyses were performed to elucidate the dimensions of stigma and its association with sociodemographic, professional and personal traits.ResultsStigmatizing attitudes of close colleagues towards patients were statistically significant predictors of higher scores on the attitude [B = 0.235 (0.168-0.858), p = 0.004], the disclosure and help-seeking subscales [B = 0.169 (0.038-0.908), p = 0.033], and the total score of the OMS-HC [B = 0.191 (0.188-1.843), p = 0.016]. Psychiatrists who had already sought help for their own problems had lower scores on the disclosure and help-seeking subscale [B = 0.202 (0.248-1.925), p = 0.011]. The overall stigmatizing attitude was predicted by the openness to participate in case discussion, supervision or Balint groups [B = 0.166 (0.178-5.886), p = 0.037] besides the more favorable attitudes of their psychiatrist colleagues [B = 0.191 (0.188-1.843), p = 0.016].ConclusionsThe favorable attitudes of psychiatrists are associated with their own experiences with any kind of psychiatric condition, previous help-seeking behavior and the opportunity to work together with fellow psychiatrists, whose attitudes are less stigmatizing. The perception of fellow colleagues' attitudes towards patients and the openness to case discussion, supervision and Balint groups were the main two factors that affected the overall attitudes towards patients; therefore, these should be considered when tailoring anti-stigma interventions for psychiatrists.

Sensory-guided acquired equivalence learning, a specific kind of non-verbal associative learning, is associated with the frontal cortex–basal ganglia loops and hippocampi, which seem to be involved in the pathogenesis of obsessive–compulsive disorder (OCD). In this study, we asked whether visual-, auditory-, and multisensory-guided associative acquired equivalence learning is affected in children with OCD. The first part of the applied learning paradigm investigated association building between two different sensory stimuli (where feedback was given about the correctness of the choices), a task that critically depends upon the basal ganglia. During the test phases, which primarily depended upon the hippocampi, the earlier learned and hitherto not shown but predictable associations were asked about without feedback. This study involved 31 children diagnosed with OCD according to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th Edition (DSM-V) criteria and 31 matched healthy control participants. The children suffering from OCD had the same performance as the control children in all phases of the applied visual-, auditory-, and multisensory-guided associative learning paradigms. Thus, both the acquisition and test phases were not negatively affected by OCD. The reaction times did not differ between the two groups, and the applied medication had no effect on the performances of the OCD patients. Our results support the findings that the structural changes of basal ganglia and hippocampi detected in adult OCD patients are not as pronounced in children, which could be the explanation of the maintained associative equivalence learning functions in children suffering from OCD.