No single environmental factor is a necessary or sufficient cause of mental disorder; multifactorial and transdiagnostic approaches are needed to understand the impact of the environment on the development of mental disorders across the life course.

Using linked multi-agency administrative data for 71 932 children from the New South Wales Child Developmental Study, using logistic regression, we examined associations between 16 environmental risk factors in early life (prenatal period to <6 years of age) and later diagnoses of mental disorder recorded in health service data (from age 6 to 13 years), both individually and summed as an environmental risk score (ERS).

The ERS was associated with all types of mental disorder diagnoses in a dose–response fashion, such that 2.8% of children with no exposure to any of the environmental factors (ERS = 0), compared to 18.3% of children with an ERS of 8 or more indicating exposure to 8 or more environmental factors (ERS ⩾ 8), had been diagnosed with any type of mental disorder up to age 13–14 years. Thirteen of the 16 environmental factors measured (including prenatal factors, neighbourhood characteristics and more proximal experiences of trauma or neglect) were positively associated with at least one category of mental disorder.

Exposure to cumulative environmental risk factors in early life is associated with an increased likelihood of presenting to health services in childhood for any kind of mental disorder. In many instances, these factors are preventable or capable of mitigation by appropriate public policy settings.

To describe the incidence of systemic overlap and typical coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) symptoms in healthcare personnel (HCP) following COVID-19 vaccination and association of reported symptoms with diagnosis of severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection in the context of public health recommendations regarding work exclusion.

This prospective cohort study was conducted between December 16, 2020, and March 14, 2021, with HCP who had received at least 1 dose of either the Pfizer-BioNTech or Moderna COVID-19 vaccine.

Large healthcare system in New England.

HCP were prompted to complete a symptom survey for 3 days after each vaccination. Reported symptoms generated automated guidance regarding symptom management, SARS-CoV-2 testing requirements, and work restrictions. Overlap symptoms (ie, fever, fatigue, myalgias, arthralgias, or headache) were categorized as either lower or higher severity. Typical COVID-19 symptoms included sore throat, cough, nasal congestion or rhinorrhea, shortness of breath, ageusia and anosmia.

Among 64,187 HCP, a postvaccination electronic survey had response rates of 83% after dose 1 and 77% after dose 2. Report of ≥3 lower-severity overlap symptoms, ≥1 higher-severity overlap symptoms, or at least 1 typical COVID-19 symptom after dose 1 was associated with increased likelihood of testing positive. HCP with prior COVID-19 infection were significantly more likely to report severe overlap symptoms after dose 1.

Reported overlap symptoms were common; however, only report of ≥3 low-severity overlap symptoms, at least 1 higher-severity overlap symptom, or any typical COVID-19 symptom were associated with infection. Work-related restrictions for overlap symptoms should be reconsidered.

Symptoms of mental disorder, particularly schizophrenia, predispose to victimization. Much less is known about the relationship between depressive symptoms and later victimization in the general population, the influence of these symptoms on types of subsequent victimization, or the role of symptom severity. We investigated this in nationally representative data from the United Kingdom.

Data were from the Adult Psychiatric Morbidity Survey 2007. Multivariable logistic regressions estimated association between (a) prior depressive symptoms, (b) prior depressive symptoms with suicide attempt, and types of more recent victimization. Gender-specific associations were estimated using multiplicative interactions.

Prior depressive symptoms were associated with greater odds of any recent intimate partner violence (IPV), emotional IPV, sexual victimization, workplace victimization, any victimization, and cumulative victimization (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] for increasing types of recent victimization: 1.47, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.14, 1.89). Prior depressive symptoms with suicide attempt were associated with any recent IPV, emotional IPV, any victimization, and cumulative victimization (aOR for increasing types of recent victimization: 2.33, 95% CI: 1.22, 4.44). Self reported recalled data on previous depressive symptoms may have limited accuracy. Small numbers of outcomes for some comparisons results in imprecision of these estimates.

Aside from severe mental illness such as schizophrenia, previous depressive symptoms in the general population are associated with greater subsequent victimization. Men and women with prior depressive symptoms may be vulnerable to a range of types of victimization, and may benefit from interventions to reduce this vulnerability.

The recall of conditionally discharged forensic patients in England is a formal order from the Ministry of Justice under the Mental Health Act (1983) which has the power to revoke conditional release and direct readmission to hospital. Recall has significant implications for the individual and for hospital services, but despite this, little is known about predictors of recall for forensic patients.

We examined the rate of recall for 101 patients conditionally discharged from medium secure forensic inpatient services between 2007 and 2013. Demographic, clinical, and forensic factors were examined as possible predictors of time to recall using Cox regression survival techniques.

Conditionally discharged patients were followed for an average of 811 days, during which 45 (44.5%) were recalled to hospital. Younger age (HR 1.89; 95% CI 1.02–3.49; p = 0.04), non-white ethnicity (HR 3.44; 95% CI 1.45–8.13), substance abuse history (HR 2.52; 95% CI 1.17–5.43), early violence (HR 1.90; 95% CI 1.03–3.50), early childhood maladjustment (HR 1.92; 95% CI 1.01–3.68), treatment with a depot medication (HR 2.17; 95% CI 1.14–4.11), being known to mental health services (HR 3.44; 95% CI 1.06–11.16), and a psychiatric admission prior to the index admission (HR 2.44; 95% CI 1.08–5.52) were significantly associated with a shorter time to recall. Treatment with clozapine reduced the risk of recall to hospital (HR 0.40; 95% CI 0.20–0.79).

Time to recall can be predicted by a range of factors that are readily available to clinical teams. Further research is required to determine if targeted interventions can modify the likelihood or time to recall for conditionally released forensic patients.

Psychosis is more prevalent among people in prison compared with the community. Early detection is important to optimise health and justice outcomes; for some, this may be the first time they have been clinically assessed.

Determine factors associated with a first diagnosis of psychosis in prison and describe time to diagnosis from entry into prison.

This retrospective cohort study describes individuals identified for the first time with psychosis in New South Wales (NSW) prisons (2006–2012). Logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with a first diagnosis of psychosis. Cox regression was used to describe time to diagnosis from entry into prison.

Of the 38 489 diagnosed with psychosis for the first time, 1.7% (n = 659) occurred in prison. Factors associated with an increased likelihood of being diagnosed in prison (versus community) were: male gender (odds ratio (OR) = 2.27, 95% CI 1.79–2.89), Aboriginality (OR = 1.81, 95% CI 1.49–2.19), older age (OR = 1.70, 95% CI 1.37–2.11 for 25–34 years and OR = 1.63, 95% CI 1.29–2.06 for 35–44 years) and disadvantaged socioeconomic area (OR = 4.41, 95% CI 3.42–5.69). Eight out of ten were diagnosed within 3 months of reception.

Among those diagnosed with psychosis for the first time, only a small number were identified during incarceration with most identified in the first 3 months following imprisonment. This suggests good screening processes are in place in NSW prisons for detecting those with serious mental illness. It is important these individuals receive appropriate care in prison, have the opportunity to have matters reheard and possibly diverted into treatment, and are subsequently connected to community mental health services on release.

None.

The intergenerational risk for mental illness is well established within diagnostic categories, but the risk is unlikely to respect diagnostic boundaries and may be reflected more broadly in early life vulnerabilities. We aimed to establish patterns of association between externalising and internalising vulnerabilities in early childhood and parental mental disorder across the full spectrum of diagnoses.

A cohort of Australian children (n = 69 116) entering the first year of school in 2009 were assessed using the Australian Early Development Census, providing measures of externalising and internalising vulnerability. Parental psychiatric diagnostic status was determined utilising record-linkage to administrative health datasets.

Parental mental illness, across diagnostic categories, was associated with all child externalising and internalising domains of vulnerability. There was little evidence to support interaction by parental or offspring sex.

These findings have important implications for informing early identification and intervention strategies in high-risk offspring and for research into the causes of mental illness. There may be benefits to focusing less on diagnostic categories in both cases.