We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
This journal utilises an Online Peer Review Service (OPRS) for submissions. By clicking "Continue" you will be taken to our partner site
https://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/eaps.
Please be aware that your Cambridge account is not valid for this OPRS and registration is required. We strongly advise you to read all "Author instructions" in the "Journal information" area prior to submitting.
To save this undefined to your undefined account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your undefined account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
With the projected surge in global dementia cases and no curative treatment available, research is increasingly focusing on lifestyle factors as preventive measures. Social and cognitive leisure activities are promising targets, but it is unclear which types of activities are more beneficial. This study investigated the individual and joint contribution of cognitive and social leisure activities to dementia risk and whether they modify the risks associated with other potentially modifiable and non-modifiable risk factors.
Methods
We used data from the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing (ELSA) from 7917 participants, followed up from 2008/2009 (Wave 4) until 2018/2019 (Wave 9) for incident dementia. Self-reported baseline cognitive activities (e.g. ‘reading the newspaper’), the number of social memberships (e.g. being a member of a social club) and social participation (e.g. ‘going to the cinema’) were clustered into high and low based on a median split. Subsequently, their individual and joint contribution to dementia risk, as well as their interaction with other dementia risk factors, were assessed with Cox regression models, adjusting for age, sex, level of education, wealth and a composite score of 11 lifestyle-related dementia risk factors.
Results
After a median follow-up period of 9.8 years, the dementia incidence rate was 54.5 cases per 10.000 person-years (95% CI 49.0–60.8). Adjusting for demographic and other lifestyle-related risk factors, higher engagement in cognitive activities (HR = 0.58; 95% CI 0.40–0.84), a greater number of social memberships (HR = 0.65; 95% CI 0.51–0.84) and more social participation (HR = 0.71; 95% CI 0.54–0.95) were associated with lower dementia risk. In a joint model, only engagement in cognitive activities (HR = 0.60; 95% CI 0.40–0.91) and social memberships (HR = 0.75; 95% CI 0.56–0.99) independently explained dementia risk. We did not find any interaction with other modifiable and non-modifiable risk factors.
Conclusions
Engagement in cognitive and social leisure activities may be beneficial for overall dementia risk, independent of each other and other risk factors. Both types of activities may be potential targets for dementia prevention measures and health advice initiatives.
Occupational Burnout (OB) is currently measured through several Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) and some of them have become widely used in occupational health research and practice. We, therefore, aimed to review and grade the psychometric validity of the five OB PROMs considered as valid for OB measure in mental health professionals (the Maslach Burnout Inventory (MBI), the Pines' Burnout Measure (BM), the Psychologist Burnout Inventory (PBI), the OLdenburg Burnout Inventory (OLBI) and the Copenhagen Burnout Inventory (CBI)).
Methods
We conducted systematic literature searches in MEDLINE, PsycINFO and EMBASE databases. We reviewed studies published between January 1980 and September 2018 following a methodological framework, in which each step of PROM validation, the reference method, analytical technics and result interpretation criteria were assessed. Using the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments we evaluated the risk of bias in studies assessing content and criterion validity, structural validity, internal consistency, reliability, measurement error, hypotheses testing and responsiveness of each PROM. Finally, we assessed the level of evidence for the validity of each PROM using the GRADE approach.
Results
We identified 6541 studies, 19 of which were included for review. Fifteen studies dealt with MBI whereas BM, PBI, OLBI and CBI were each examined in only one study. OLBI had the most complete validation, followed by CBI, MBI, BM and PBI, respectively. When examining the result interpretation correctness, the strongest disagreement was observed for MBI (27% of results), BM (25%) and CBI (17%). There was no disagreement regarding PBI and OLBI. For OLBI and CBI, the quality of evidence for sufficient content validity, the crucial psychometric property, was moderate; for MBI, BM and PBI, it was very low.
Conclusion
To be validly and reliably used in medical research and practice, PROM should exhibit robust psychometric properties. Among the five PROMs reviewed, CBI and, to a lesser extent, OLBI meet this prerequisite. The cross-cultural validity of these PROMs was beyond the scope of our work and should be addressed in the future. Moreover, the development of a diagnostic standard for OB would be helpful to assess the sensitivity and specificity of the PROMs and further reexamine their validity.
The study protocol was registered in PROSPERO (CRD 42019124621).
The clinical outcomes of individuals at clinical high risk of psychosis (CHR-P) who do not transition to psychosis are heterogeneous and inconsistently reported. We aimed to comprehensively evaluate longitudinally a wide range of outcomes in CHR-P individuals not developing psychosis.
Methods
“Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses” and “Meta-analysis Of Observational Studies in Epidemiology”-compliant meta-analysis (PROSPERO: CRD42021229212) searching original CHR-P longitudinal studies in PubMed and Web of Science databases up to 01/11/2021. As primary analysis, we evaluated the following outcomes within CHR-P non-transitioning individuals: (a) change in the severity of attenuated psychotic symptoms (Hedge's g); (b) change in the severity of negative psychotic symptoms (Hedge's g); (c) change in the severity of depressive symptoms (Hedge's g); (d) change in the level of functioning (Hedge's g); (e) frequency of remission (at follow-up). As a secondary analysis, we compared these outcomes in those CHR-P individuals who did not transition vs. those who did transition to psychosis at follow-up. We conducted random-effects model meta-analyses, sensitivity analyses, heterogeneity analyses, meta-regressions and publication bias assessment. The risk of bias was assessed using a modified version of the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS).
Results
Twenty-eight studies were included (2756 CHR-P individuals, mean age = 20.4, 45.5% females). The mean duration of follow-up of the included studies was of 30.7 months. Primary analysis: attenuated psychotic symptoms [Hedges’ g = 1.410, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.002–1.818]; negative psychotic symptoms (Hedges’ g = 0.683, 95% CI 0.371–0.995); depressive symptoms (Hedges’ g = 0.844, 95% CI 0.371–1.317); and functioning (Hedges’ g = 0.776, 95% CI 0.463–1.089) improved in CHR-P non-transitioning individuals; 48.7% remitted at follow-up (95% CI 39.3–58.2%). Secondary analysis: attenuated psychotic symptoms (Hedges’ g = 0.706, 95% CI 0.091–1.322) and functioning (Hedges’ g = 0.623, 95% CI 0.375–0.871) improved in CHR-P individuals not-transitioning compared to those transitioning to psychosis, but there were no differences in negative or depressive symptoms or frequency of remission (p > 0.05). Older age was associated with higher improvements of attenuated psychotic symptoms (β = 0.225, p = 0.012); publication years were associated with a higher improvement of functioning (β = −0.124, p = 0.0026); a lower proportion of Brief Limited Intermittent Psychotic Symptoms was associated with higher frequencies of remission (β = −0.054, p = 0.0085). There was no metaregression impact for study continent, the psychometric instrument used, the quality of the study or proportion of females. The NOS scores were 4.4 ± 0.9, ranging from 3 to 6, revealing the moderate quality of the included studies.
Conclusions
Clinical outcomes improve in CHR-P individuals not transitioning to psychosis but only less than half remit over time. Sustained clinical attention should be provided in the longer term to monitor these outcomes.
Lifestyle interventions are an important and viable approach for preventing cognitive deficits. However, the results of studies on alcohol, coffee and tea consumption in relation to cognitive decline have been divergent, likely due to confounds from dose–response effects. This meta-analysis aimed to find the dose–response relationship between alcohol, coffee or tea consumption and cognitive deficits.
Methods
Prospective cohort studies or nested case-control studies in a cohort investigating the risk factors of cognitive deficits were searched in PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane and Web of Science up to 4th June 2020. Two authors searched the databases and extracted the data independently. We also assessed the quality of the studies with the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. Stata 15.0 software was used to perform model estimation and plot the linear or nonlinear dose–response relationship graphs.
Results
The search identified 29 prospective studies from America, Japan, China and some European countries. The dose–response relationships showed that compared to non-drinkers, low consumption (<11 g/day) of alcohol could reduce the risk of cognitive deficits or only dementias, but there was no significant effect of heavier drinking (>11 g/day). Low consumption of coffee reduced the risk of any cognitive deficit (<2.8 cups/day) or dementia (<2.3 cups/day). Green tea consumption was a significant protective factor for cognitive health (relative risk, 0.94; 95% confidence intervals, 0.92–0.97), with one cup of tea per day brings a 6% reduction in risk of cognitive deficits.
Conclusions
Light consumption of alcohol (<11 g/day) and coffee (<2.8 cups/day) was associated with reduced risk of cognitive deficits. Cognitive benefits of green tea consumption increased with the daily consumption.
To develop recommendations for strategies and interventions to reduce stigma and discrimination related to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), through reviewing and synthesising evidence in relation to COVID-19 and other disease outbreaks and infectious/stigmatised conditions from systematic reviews and primary studies and recommendations from additional materials.
Methods
Rapid review, drawing on the World Health Organization's (WHO) methodology for developing interim guidelines during health emergencies. PubMed/MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Cochrane Central and Campbell Collaboration searched up to mid-April 2020. Searches were supplemented by reference-searching and expert recommendations. Searches were designed to identify: (1) systematic reviews (<10 years), or (2) primary intervention studies (no date limit) reporting evidence on anti-stigma interventions (in relation to COVID-19 or other infectious/stigmatised conditions) or (3) additional relevant materials. Data were extracted on population, intervention, outcome and results. These data were compiled into evidence summary tables and narrative overviews. Recommendations on strategies for COVID-19 stigma-reduction were developed using the WHO ‘Evidence to Decision’ framework approach. The review protocol was registered with PROSPERO (registration ID: CRD42020177677).
Results
The searches identified a total of 4150 potentially relevant records, from which 12 systematic reviews and 29 additional articles were included. Overarching considerations and specific recommendations focus on: (1) language/words used in relation to COVID-19 and affected people; (2) media/journalistic practices; (3) public health interventions; (4) targeted public health interventions for key groups and (5) involving communities and key stakeholders.
Conclusions
These recommendations represent the first consolidated evidence-based guidance on stigma and discrimination reduction in relation to COVID-19. Mitigating the impact of stigma is critical in reducing distress and negative experiences, and strengthening communities' resolve to work together during exceptional circumstances. Ultimately, reducing stigma helps addressing structural inequalities that drive marginalisation and exacerbate both health risks and the impact of stigma. Administrations and decision makers are urged to consider integrating these recommendations into the ongoing COVID-19 response.
It remains unclear whether the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic is having an impact on suicide rates (SR). Economic insecurity and mental disorders are risk factors for suicide, which may increase during the pandemic.
Methods
Data on suicide events in a major city in Germany, and the corresponding life years (LY) were provided by the local authorities. For the year 2020, periods without restrictions on freedom of movement and social contact were compared with periods of moderate and severe COVID-19 restrictions. To avoid distortions due to seasonal fluctuations and linear time trends, suicide risk during the COVID-19 pandemic was compared with data from 2010 to 2019 using an interrupted time series analysis.
Results
A total of 643 suicides were registered and 6 032 690 LY were spent between 2010 and 2020. Of these, 53 suicides and 450 429 LY accounted for the year 2020.
In 2020, SR (suicides per 100 000 LY) were lower in periods with severe COVID-19 restrictions (SR = 7.2, χ2 = 4.033, p = 0.045) compared with periods without restrictions (SR = 16.8). A comparison with previous years showed that this difference was caused by unusually high SR before the imposition of restrictions, while SR during the pandemic were within the trend corridor of previous years (expected suicides = 32.3, observed suicides = 35; IRR = 1.084, p = 0.682).
Conclusions
SR during COVID-19 pandemic are in line with the trend in previous years. Careful monitoring of SR in the further course of the COVID-19 crisis is urgently needed. The findings have regional reference and should not be over-generalised.
To investigate the prevalence of suicidal thoughts and behaviours (STB; i.e. suicidal ideation, plans or attempts) in the Spanish adult general population during the first wave of the Spain coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic (March−July, 2020), and to investigate the individual- and population-level impact of relevant distal and proximal STB risk factor domains.
Methods
Cross-sectional study design using data from the baseline assessment of an observational cohort study (MIND/COVID project). A nationally representative sample of 3500 non-institutionalised Spanish adults (51.5% female; mean age = 49.6 [s.d. = 17.0]) was taken using dual-frame random digit dialing, stratified for age, sex and geographical area. Professional interviewers carried out computer-assisted telephone interviews (1–30 June 2020). Thirty-day STB was assessed using modified items from the Columbia Suicide Severity Rating Scale. Distal (i.e. pre-pandemic) risk factors included sociodemographic variables, number of physical health conditions and pre-pandemic lifetime mental disorders; proximal (i.e. pandemic) risk factors included current mental disorders and a range of adverse events-experiences related to the pandemic. Logistic regression was used to investigate individual-level associations (odds ratios [OR]) and population-level associations (population attributable risk proportions [PARP]) between risk factors and 30-day STB. All data were weighted using post-stratification survey weights.
Results
Estimated prevalence of 30-day STB was 4.5% (1.8% active suicidal ideation; n = 5 [0.1%] suicide attempts). STB was 9.7% among the 34.3% of respondents with pre-pandemic lifetime mental disorders, and 1.8% among the 65.7% without any pre-pandemic lifetime mental disorder. Factors significantly associated with STB were pre-pandemic lifetime mental disorders (total PARP = 49.1%) and current mental disorders (total PARP = 58.4%), i.e. major depressive disorder (OR = 6.0; PARP = 39.2%), generalised anxiety disorder (OR = 5.6; PARP = 36.3%), post-traumatic stress disorder (OR = 4.6; PARP = 26.6%), panic attacks (OR = 6.7; PARP = 36.6%) and alcohol/substance use disorder (OR = 3.3; PARP = 5.9%). Pandemic-related adverse events-experiences associated with STB were lack of social support, interpersonal stress, stress about personal health and about the health of loved ones (PARPs 32.7–42.6%%), and having loved ones infected with COVID-19 (OR = 1.7; PARP = 18.8%). Up to 74.1% of STB is potentially attributable to the joint effects of mental disorders and adverse events−experiences related to the pandemic.
Conclusions
STB at the end of the first wave of the Spain COVID-19 pandemic was high, and large proportions of STB are potentially attributable to mental disorders and adverse events−experiences related to the pandemic, including health-related stress, lack of social support and interpersonal stress. There is an urgent need to allocate resources to increase access to adequate mental healthcare, even in times of healthcare system overload.
The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic represents an unprecedented threat to mental health. Herein, we assessed the impact of COVID-19 on subthreshold depressive symptoms and identified potential mitigating factors.
Methods
Participants were from Depression Cohort in China (ChiCTR registry number 1900022145). Adults (n = 1722) with subthreshold depressive symptoms were enrolled between March and October 2019 in a 6-month, community-based interventional study that aimed to prevent clinical depression using psychoeducation. A total of 1506 participants completed the study in Shenzhen, China: 726 participants, who completed the study between March 2019 and January 2020 (i.e. before COVID-19), comprised the ‘wave 1’ group; 780 participants, who were enrolled before COVID-19 and completed the 6-month endpoint assessment during COVID-19, comprised ‘wave 2’. Symptoms of depression, anxiety and insomnia were assessed at baseline and endpoint (i.e. 6-month follow-up) using the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9), Generalised Anxiety Disorder-7 (GAD-7) and Insomnia Severity Index (ISI), respectively. Measures of resilience and regular exercise were assessed at baseline. We compared the mental health outcomes between wave 1 and wave 2 groups. We additionally investigated how mental health outcomes changed across disparate stages of the COVID-19 pandemic in China, i.e. peak (7–13 February), post-peak (14–27 February), remission plateau (28 February−present).
Results
COVID-19 increased the risk for three mental outcomes: (1) depression (odds ratio [OR] = 1.30, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.04–1.62); (2) anxiety (OR = 1.47, 95% CI: 1.16–1.88) and (3) insomnia (OR = 1.37, 95% CI: 1.07–1.77). The highest proportion of probable depression and anxiety was observed post-peak, with 52.9% and 41.4%, respectively. Greater baseline resilience scores had a protective effect on the three main outcomes (depression: OR = 0.26, 95% CI: 0.19–0.37; anxiety: OR = 1.22, 95% CI: 0.14–0.33 and insomnia: OR = 0.18, 95% CI: 0.11–0.28). Furthermore, regular physical activity mitigated the risk for depression (OR = 0.79, 95% CI: 0.79–0.99).
Conclusions
The COVID-19 pandemic exerted a highly significant and negative impact on symptoms of depression, anxiety and insomnia. Mental health outcomes fluctuated as a function of the duration of the pandemic and were alleviated to some extent with the observed decline in community-based transmission. Augmenting resiliency and regular exercise provide an opportunity to mitigate the risk for mental health symptoms during this severe public health crisis.
There is a lack of evidence related to the prevalence of mental health symptoms as well as their heterogeneities during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic in Latin America, a large area spanning the equator. The current study aims to provide meta-analytical evidence on mental health symptoms during COVID-19 among frontline healthcare workers, general healthcare workers, the general population and university students in Latin America.
Methods
Bibliographical databases, such as PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, PsycINFO and medRxiv, were systematically searched to identify pertinent studies up to August 13, 2021. Two coders performed the screening using predefined eligibility criteria. Studies were assigned quality scores using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. The double data extraction method was used to minimise data entry errors.
Results
A total of 62 studies with 196 950 participants in Latin America were identified. The pooled prevalence of anxiety, depression, distress and insomnia was 35%, 35%, 32% and 35%, respectively. There was a higher prevalence of mental health symptoms in South America compared to Central America (36% v. 28%, p < 0.001), in countries speaking Portuguese (40%) v. Spanish (30%). The pooled prevalence of mental health symptoms in the general population, general healthcare workers, frontline healthcare workers and students in Latin America was 37%, 34%, 33% and 45%, respectively.
Conclusions
The high yet heterogenous level of prevalence of mental health symptoms emphasises the need for appropriate identification of psychological interventions in Latin America.
Sleep disturbance is an important factor in the pathophysiology and progression of psychiatric disorders, but whether it is a cause, or a downstream effect is still not clear.
Methods
To investigate causal relationships between three sleep-associated traits and seven psychiatric diseases, we used genetic variants related to insomnia, chronotype and sleep duration to perform a two-sample bidirectional Mendelian randomisation analysis. Summary-level data on psychiatric disorders were extracted from the Psychiatric Genomics Consortium. Effect estimates were obtained by using the inverse-variance-weighted (IVW), weights modified IVW, weighted-median methods, MR-Egger regression, MR pleiotropy residual sum and outlier (MR-PRESSO) test and Robust Adjusted Profile Score (RAPS).
Results
The causal odds ratio (OR) estimate of genetically determined insomnia was 1.33 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.22–1.45; p = 5.03 × 10−11) for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), 1.31 (95% CI 1.25–1.37; p = 6.88 × 10−31) for major depressive disorder (MDD) and 1.32 (95% CI 1.23–1.40; p = 1.42 × 10−16) for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). There were suggestive inverse associations of morningness chronotype with risk of MDD and schizophrenia (SCZ). Genetically predicted sleep duration was also nominally associated with the risk of bipolar disorder (BD). Conversely, PTSD and MDD were associated with an increased risk of insomnia (OR = 1.06, 95% CI 1.03–1.10, p = 7.85 × 10−4 for PTSD; OR = 1.37, 95% CI 1.14–1.64; p = 0.001 for MDD). A suggestive inverse association of ADHD and MDD with sleep duration was also observed.
Conclusions
Our findings provide evidence of potential causal relationships between sleep disturbance and psychiatric disorders. This suggests that abnormal sleep patterns may serve as markers for psychiatric disorders and offer opportunities for prevention and management in psychiatric disorders.
The SARS-Cov-2 pandemic and the lockdown response are assumed to have increased mental health problems in general populations compared to pre-pandemic times. The aim of this paper is to review studies on the course of mental health problems during and after the first lockdown phase.
Methods
We conducted a rapid review of multi-wave studies in general populations with time points during and after the first lockdown phase. Repeated cross-sectional and longitudinal studies that utilised validated instruments were included. The main outcome was whether indicators of mental health problems have changed during and after the first lockdown phase. The study was registered with PROSPERO No. CRD42020218640.
Results
Twenty-three studies with 56 indicators were included in the qualitative review. Studies that reported data from pre-pandemic assessments through lockdown indicated an increase in mental health problems. During lockdown, no uniform trend could be identified. After lockdown, mental health problems decreased slightly.
Conclusions
As mental health care utilisation indicators and data on suicides do not suggest an increase in demand during the first lockdown phase, we regard the increase in mental health problems as general distress that is to be expected during a global health crisis. Several methodological, pandemic-related, response-related and health policy-related factors need to be considered when trying to gain a broader perspective on the impact of the first wave of the pandemic and the first phase of lockdown on general populations' mental health.
Due to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) different countries implemented quarantine measures to limit the spread of the virus. Many studies analysed the mental health consequences of restrictive confinement, some of which focused their attention on specific populations. The general public's mental health also requires significant attention, however. This study aimed to evaluate the effects of the COVID-19 quarantine on the general population's mental health in different European countries. Risk and protective factors associated with the psychological symptoms were analysed.
Methods
A systematic search was conducted on four electronic databases (PubMed, PsycINFO, Scopus and Google Scholar). Studies published up until 20th April 2021, and following eligibility criteria were selected for this review. One thousand three hundred thirty-five (1335) studies were screened, 105 of which were included. Via network analysis, the current study investigated the pathways that underlie possible risk factors for mental health outcomes.
Results
Anxiety, depression, distress and post-traumatic symptoms are frequently experienced during the COVID-19 quarantine and are often associated with changes in sleeping and eating habits. Some socio-demographic and COVID-19-related variables were found to be risk factors for an individual's wellbeing. In particular, being female, young, having a low income, being unemployed and having COVID-19-like symptoms or chronic disorders, were found to be the most common risk factors for mental health symptoms.
Conclusions
The COVID-19 pandemic represented an unprecedented threat to mental health globally. In order to prevent psychological morbidity and offer support tailored to short-, medium- and long-term negative outcomes, it is essential to identify the direct and indirect psychosocial effects of the lockdown and quarantine measures, especially in certain vulnerable groups. In addition to measures to reduce the curve of viral transmission, policy makers should urgently take into consideration provisions to alleviate hazards to mental health.
Chinese university students are at high risk for depressive symptoms and the ongoing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic may have exacerbated the mental health of university students. However, existing studies on depressive symptoms in Chinese university students during the COVID-19 pandemic reported a wide range of prevalence estimates, making mental health planning for this population difficult. The objective of this study was to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of surveys that assessed the prevalence of depressive symptoms in Chinese university students amid the COVID-19 pandemic.
Methods
Major Chinese (CNKI, Wanfang, VIP) and English (PubMed, Embase, PsycInfo) databases and preprint platforms were searched to identify cross-sectional studies containing data on the prevalence of depressive symptoms in Chinese university students during the pandemic. Two authors independently retrieved the literature, evaluated the eligibility of potential studies, assessed the risk of bias (RoB) of included studies, and extracted data. RoB was assessed with the Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Checklist for Studies Reporting Prevalence Data.
Results
In total, 1177 records were retrieved, and 84 studies involving 1 292 811 Chinese university students during the pandemic were included. None of the included studies were rated as completely low RoB. Statistically significant heterogeneity in the prevalence estimates of included studies was detected (I2 = 99.9%, p < 0.001). The pooled prevalence of depressive symptoms was 26.0% (95%CI: 23.3–28.9%), which was significantly higher in female than in male students (30.8% v. 28.6%, p < 0.001), in postgraduates than in undergraduates (29.3% v. 22.9%, p < 0.001), in students living inside than in those living outside the COVID-19 epicentre (27.5% v. 22.3%, P < 0.001), in students from universities at the epicentre than in those from universities outside the epicentre (26.2% v. 23.1%, p < 0.001), in students who had close contact with COVID-19 than in those who did not (46.0% v. 25.0%, p < 0.001), and in students who had acquaintances or relatives infected with COVID-19 (39.7% v. 24.0%, p < 0.001) than in those who did not. Five sources of heterogeneity were identified from the subgroup analysis: survey period, % of males among the survey sample, scale of depressive symptoms, cutoff score of the scale and level of RoB.
Conclusions
Over one-fourth of Chinese university students experienced depressive symptoms during the COVID-19 pandemic. Mental health services for this population should include periodic evaluation of depressive symptoms, expanded social support and psychiatric assessment and treatment when necessary. It is also necessary to design depression prevention programmes that target higher-risk cohorts of university students.
Suicide accounts for 2.2% of all years of life lost worldwide. We aimed to establish whether infectious epidemics are associated with any changes in the incidence of suicide or the period prevalence of self-harm, or thoughts of suicide or self-harm, with a secondary objective of establishing the frequency of these outcomes.
Methods
In this systematic review and meta-analysis, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO and AMED were searched from inception to 9 September 2020. Studies of infectious epidemics reporting outcomes of (a) death by suicide, (b) self-harm or (c) thoughts of suicide or self-harm were identified. A random-effects model meta-analysis for the period prevalence of thoughts of suicide or self-harm was conducted.
Results
In total, 1354 studies were screened with 57 meeting eligibility criteria, of which 7 described death by suicide, 9 by self-harm, and 45 thoughts of suicide or self-harm. The observation period ranged from 1910 to 2020 and included epidemics of Spanish Flu, severe acute respiratory syndrome, human monkeypox, Ebola virus disease and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Regarding death by suicide, data with a clear longitudinal comparison group were available for only two epidemics: SARS in Hong Kong, finding an increase in suicides among the elderly, and COVID-19 in Japan, finding no change in suicides among children and adolescents. In terms of self-harm, five studies examined emergency department attendances in epidemic and non-epidemic periods, of which four found no difference and one showed a reduction during the epidemic. In studies of thoughts of suicide or self-harm, one large survey showed a substantial increase in period prevalence compared to non-epidemic periods, but smaller studies showed no difference. As a secondary objective, a meta-analysis of thoughts of suicide and self-harm found that the pooled prevalence was 8.0% overall (95% confidence interval (CI) 5.2–12.0%; 14 820 of 99 238 cases in 24 studies) over a time period of between seven days and six months. The quality assessment found 42 studies were of low quality, nine of moderate quality and six of high quality.
Conclusions
There is little robust evidence on the association of infectious epidemics with suicide, self-harm and thoughts of suicide or self-harm. There was an increase in suicides among the elderly in Hong Kong during SARS and no change in suicides among young people in Japan during COVID-19, but it is unclear how far these findings may be generalised. The development of up-to-date self-harm and suicide statistics to monitor the effect of the current pandemic is an urgent priority.
Anxiety disorders are widespread across the world. A systematic understanding of the disease burden, temporal trend and risk factors of anxiety disorders provides the essential foundation for targeted public policies on mental health at the national, regional, and global levels.
Methods
The estimation of anxiety disorders in the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019 using systematic review was conducted to describe incidence, prevalence and disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) in 204 countries and regions from 1990 to 2019. We calculated the estimated annual percentage change (EAPC) to quantify the temporal trends in anxiety disorders burden by sex, region and age over the past 30 years and analysed the impact of epidemiological and demographic changes on anxiety disorders.
Results
Globally, 45.82 [95% uncertainty interval (UI): 37.14, 55.62] million incident cases of anxiety disorders, 301.39 million (95% UI: 252.63, 356.00) prevalent cases and 28.68 (95% UI: 19.86, 39.32) million DALYs were estimated in 2019. Although the overall age-standardised burden rate of anxiety disorders remained stable over the past three decades, the latest absolute number of anxiety disorders increased by 50% from 1990. We observed huge disparities in both age-standardised burden rate and changing trend of anxiety disorders in sex, country and age. In 2019, 7.07% of the global DALYs due to anxiety disorders were attributable to bullying victimisation, mainly among the population aged 5–39 years, and the proportion increased in almost all countries and territories compared with 1990.
Conclusion
Anxiety disorder is still the most common mental illness in the world and has a striking impact on the global burden of disease. Controlling potential risk factors, such as bullying, establishing effective mental health knowledge dissemination and diversifying intervention strategies adapted to specific characteristics will reduce the burden of anxiety disorders.
Depression severely affects people's health and well-being. Oral diseases have been suggested to be associated with depression, but so far, there is no causal evidence. This study aimed to identify the causal effect of tooth loss on depression among US adults in a natural experiment study.
Methods
Instrumental variable analysis was conducted using data from 169 061 respondents born in 1940–1978 who participated in the 2006, 2008 or 2010 waves of the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS). Random variation in tooth loss due to differential childhood exposure to drinking water fluoride was exploited as an instrument.
Results
US adults who were exposed to drinking water fluoride in childhood had more remaining teeth, therefore providing a robust instrument (F = 73.4). For each additional tooth loss, depressive symptoms according to the eight-item Patient Health Questionnaire depression (PHQ-8) score increased by 0.146 (95% CI 0.008–0.284), and the probability of having clinical depression (PHQ ⩾10) increased by 0.81 percentage points (95% CI −0.12 to 1.73).
Conclusions
Tooth loss causally increased depression among US adults. Losing ten or more teeth had an impact comparable to adults with major depressive disorder not receiving antidepressant drugs.
Bipolar disorder is associated with premature mortality, but evidence is mostly derived from Western countries. There has been no research evaluating shortened lifespan in bipolar disorder using life-years lost (LYLs), which is a recently developed mortality metric taking into account illness onset for life expectancy estimation. The current study aimed to examine the extent of premature mortality in bipolar disorder patients relative to the general population in Hong Kong (HK) in terms of standardised mortality ratio (SMR) and excess LYLs, and changes of mortality rate over time.
Methods
This population-based cohort study investigated excess mortality in 12 556 bipolar disorder patients between 2008 and 2018, by estimating all-cause and cause-specific SMRs, and LYLs. Trends in annual SMRs over the 11-year study period were assessed. Study data were retrieved from a territory-wide medical-record database of HK public healthcare services.
Results
Patients had higher all-cause [SMR: 2.60 (95% CI: 2.45–2.76)], natural-cause [SMR: 1.90 (95% CI: 1.76–2.05)] and unnatural-cause [SMR: 8.63 (95% CI: 7.34–10.03)] mortality rates than the general population. Respiratory diseases, cardiovascular diseases and cancers accounted for the majority of deaths. Men and women with bipolar disorder had 6.78 (95% CI: 6.00–7.84) years and 7.35 (95% CI: 6.75–8.06) years of excess LYLs, respectively. The overall mortality gap remained similar over time, albeit slightly improved in men with bipolar disorder.
Conclusions
Bipolar disorder is associated with increased premature mortality and substantially reduced lifespan in a predominantly Chinese population, with excess deaths mainly attributed to natural causes. Persistent mortality gap underscores an urgent need for targeted interventions to improve physical health of patients with bipolar disorder.
To assess the association of sleep factors (sleep duration, trouble sleeping, sleep disorder) and combined sleep behaviours with the risk of clinically relevant depression (CRD).
Methods
A total of 17 859 participants (8806 males and 9053 females) aged 20–79 years from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) 2007–2014 waves were included. Sleep duration, trouble sleeping and sleep disorder were asked in the home by trained interviewers using the Computer-Assisted Personal Interviewing (CAPI) system. The combined sleep behaviours were referred to as ‘sleep patterns (healthy, intermediate and poor)’, with a ‘healthy sleep pattern’ defined as sleeping 7–9 h per night with no self-reported trouble sleeping or sleep disorders. And intermediate and poor sleep patterns indicated 1 and 2–3 sleep problems, respectively. Weighted logistic regression was performed to evaluate the association of sleep factors and sleep patterns with the risk of depressive symptoms.
Results
The total prevalence of CRD was 9.5% among the 17 859 participants analysed, with females having almost twice as frequency than males. Compared to normal sleep duration (7–9 h), both short and long sleep duration were linked with a higher risk of CRD (short sleep: OR: 1.66, 95% CI: 1.39–1.98; long sleep: OR: 2.75, 95% CI: 1.93–3.92). The self-reported sleep complaints, whether trouble sleeping or sleep disorder, were significantly related with CRD (trouble sleeping: OR: 3.04, 95% CI: 2.59–3.56; sleep disorder: OR: 1.83, 95% CI: 1.44–2.34). Furthermore, the correlations appeared to be higher for individuals with poor sleep pattern (OR: 5.98, 95% CI: 4.91–7.29).
Conclusions
In this national representative survey, it was shown that there was a dose-response relationship between sleep patterns and CRD.
Retirement is a major life transition that may improve or worsen mental health, including depression. Existing studies provide contradictory results. We conducted a systematic review with meta-analysis to quantitatively pool available evidence on the association of retirement and depressive symptoms.
Methods
We applied PRISMA guidelines to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to retrieve, quantitatively pool and critically evaluate the association between retirement and both incident and prevalent depression and to understand better the potential role of individual and contextual-level determinants. Relevant original studies were identified by searching PubMed, Embase, PsycINFO and the Cochrane Library, through 4 March 2021. Subgroup and sensitivity meta-analyses were conducted by gender, study design (longitudinal v. cross-sectional studies), study quality score (QS) and considering studies using validated scales to diagnose depression. Heterogeneity between studies was evaluated with I2 statistics.
Results
Forty-one original studies met our a priori defined inclusion criteria. Meta-analysis on more than half a million subjects (n = 557 111) from 60 datasets suggested a protective effect of retirement on the risk of depression [effect size (ES) = 0.83, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.74–0.93], although with high statistical heterogeneity between risk estimates (χ2 = 895.19, df = 59, I2 = 93.41%, p-value < 0.0001). Funnel plot asymmetry and trim and fill method suggested a minor potential publication bias. Results were consistent, confirm their robustness and suggest stronger protective effects when progressively restricting the included studies based on quality criteria: (i) studies with the highest QS [55 datasets, 407 086 subjects, ES = 0.81, 95% CI = 0.71–0.91], (ii) studies with a high QS and using validated assessment tools to diagnose depression (44 datasets, 239 453 subjects, ES = 0.76, 95% CI = 0.65–0.88) and (iii) studies of high quality, using a validated tool and with a longitudinal design (24 datasets, 162 004 subjects, ES = 0.76, 95% CI = 0.64–0.90). We observed a progressive reduction in funnel plot asymmetry. About gender, no statistically significant difference was found (females ES = 0.79, 95% CI = 0.61–1.02 v. men ES = 0.87, 95% CI = 0.68–1.11).
Conclusions
Pooled data suggested that retirement reduces by nearly 20% the risk of depression; such estimates got stronger when limiting the analysis to longitudinal and high-quality studies, even if results are affected by high heterogeneity.
As retirement seems to have an independent and protective effect on mental health and depressive symptoms, greater flexibility in retirement timing should be granted to older workers to reduce their mental burden and avoid the development of severe depression. Retirement may also be identified as a target moment for preventive interventions, particularly primary and secondary prevention, to promote health and wellbeing in older ages, boosting the observed impact.
One of the most used methods to examine sources of heterogeneity in meta-analyses is the so-called ‘subgroup analysis’. In a subgroup analysis, the included studies are divided into two or more subgroups, and it is tested whether the pooled effect sizes found in these subgroups differ significantly from each other. Subgroup analyses can be considered as a core component of most published meta-analyses. One important problem of subgroup analyses is the lack of statistical power to find significant differences between subgroups. In this paper, we explore the power problems of subgroup analyses in more detail, using ‘metapower’, a recently developed statistical package in R to examine power in meta-analyses, including subgroup analyses. We show that subgroup analyses require many more included studies in a meta-analysis than are needed for the main analyses. We work out an example of an ‘average’ meta-analysis, in which a subgroup analysis requires 3–4 times the number of studies that are needed for the main analysis to have sufficient power. This number of studies increases exponentially with decreasing effect sizes and when the studies are not evenly divided over the subgroups. Higher heterogeneity also requires increasing numbers of studies. We conclude that subgroup analyses remain an important method to examine potential sources of heterogeneity in meta-analyses, but that meta-analysts should keep in mind that power is very low for most subgroup analyses. As in any statistical evaluation, researchers should not rely on a test and p-value to interpret results, but should compare the confidence intervals and interpret results carefully.