The evidence base for racemic ketamine treatment for treatment-resistant major depressive disorder (TRD) continues to expand, but there are major challenges translating this evidence base into routine clinical care.

To prepare guidelines for ketamine treatment of TRD that are suitable for routine use by publicly funded specialist mental health services.

We consulted with senior leadership, clinical pharmacy, psychiatrists, nursing, service users and Māori mental health workers on issues relating to ketamine treatment. We prepared treatment guidelines taking the evidence base for ketamine treatment and the consultation into account.

Ketamine treatment guidance is reported. This offers two treatment pathways, including a test of ketamine responsiveness with intramuscular ketamine and the dominant use of oral ketamine for a 3-month course to maximise the opportunity for the short-term benefits of ketamine to accumulate.

We have responded to the challenges of translating the evidence base for ketamine treatment into a form suitable for routine care.

The World Health Organization (WHO) has developed and supported numerous initiatives to build capacity and awareness about health emergency and disaster risk management (Health EDRM). These include establishing the Health EDRM Research Network (Health EDRM RN) in 2018 and the publication of the Health EDRM Framework in 2019. These initiatives recognize that research is vital to generating the evidence to inform decision making and research that is integral to disaster preparedness, response and recovery will be vital to delivering the aspirations associated with caring, coping and overcoming in an increasingly challenging world.

To strengthen the capacity for conduct and use of research, resources were developed by the WHO Guidance on Research Methods for Health EDRM.

This first WHO textbook on Health EDRM research methods was published in 2021 and updated in 2022 with a chapter on Health EDRM research in the context of COVID-19. The 44 chapters offer practical advice about how to plan, conduct and report on a variety of quantitative and qualitative studies that can inform questions about policies and programs for health-related emergencies and disasters across different settings and level of resources. Case studies of direct relevance to Health EDRM provide real-life examples of research methods and how they have modified policies.

More than 160 authors in 30 countries contributed to the guidance, which is relevant to researchers, would-be researchers, policy makers and practitioners. It should help improve the quality of Health EDRM research; the quality of policy, practice and guidance supported by the evidence generated; and research capacity, collaboration and engagement among researchers, the research community, policy-makers, practitioners and other stakeholders.

The Guidance is being supplemented by additional resources, including audio podcasts, slideshows, video presentations and webinars, and the content as a whole will be discussed in this presentation.

Policymakers, practitioners and the public all have a role in health emergency and disaster risk management (Health EDRM). They need to access, understand and use evidence from research to take actions to reduce health risks and harm. They need the best available evidence to maximize their ability to save lives and reduce suffering. Evidence Aid seeks to meet this need through collections of specially prepared plain-language summaries of systematic reviews, freely available online in multiple languages (www.EvidenceAid.org). The summaries and webpages can be linked to reference management software and embedded in other websites.

Evidence Aid has added a substantial number of summaries to its collections since 2020, for example, adding a collection for reviews of relevance to the COVID-19 pandemic and its associated measures. From 2021, Evidence Aid built on its partnership with the Pan American Health Organization (PAHO/WHO) to identify and summarize reviews relevant to building resilience into health systems. This included enhancements enriching the content of each summary with the authors’ implications for practice and research, equity considerations and funding sources.

In November 2022, the Resilient Health Systems collection contained more than 200 summaries relevant to ensuring that health systems are resilient to emergencies, disasters and related challenges. There were also 600 summaries relevant to the COVID-19 pandemic, 150 on the health of refugees and asylum seekers, more than 100 on physical and mental health impacts of disasters and 110 on preventing and treating acute malnutrition.

Evidence Aid’s 1000+ summaries of systematic reviews relevant to Health EDRM provide a unique gateway into this evidence base for policymakers, practitioners and the public wishing to ensure that disaster preparedness, response, recovery and rehabilitation are effective and efficient. It should be a key component in helping people and organizations to care, cope and overcome in an increasingly challenging world.

In order to promote useful and usable scientific evidence for health emergency and disaster risk management (Health EDRM), the World Health Organization (WHO) Health EDRM Knowledge Hub has been established as part of the WHO Thematic Platform for Health EDRM research network (Health EDRM RN). The Knowledge Hub aims to extend scientific knowledge; strengthen evidence-based practice in the management of health risks in emergencies and disasters; create and develop a competent network in the Health EDRM community; and integrate research, policy and practice.

To begin with, the Knowledge Hub has five interconnected research themes: (1) health data management; (2) psychosocial support; (3) health needs of sub-populations; (4) health workforce development; and (5) research methods. Systematic literature reviews and expert consultations have assessed current research under each theme and identified potential knowledge gaps. The work of the Knowledge Hub is advised by members of the Health EDRM RN and staff in WHO regional offices.

The WHO Health EDRM Knowledge Hub will be a platform for providing and exchanging up-to-date evidence. This will include information on validated methods for managing health data and identifying health needs in specific subpopulations. The Knowledge Hub will raise awareness of psychosocial support, health workforce development and research before, during and after disasters. It is targeted to policy-makers, researchers, practitioners and the broader community with the aim of accelerating evidence-informed policy and programs. This will support implementation of the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015–2030, the WHO Health EDRM Framework, and other related global, regional and national agendas.

This paper introduces this new initiative and describes its objectives, design, and implementation. Additionally, it provides an overview of the Knowledge Hub and invites session participants to provide insights into their current needs and to make recommendations for improvement.

Diagnoses of personality disorder are prevalent among people using community secondary mental health services. Identifying cost-effective community-based interventions is important when working with finite resources.

To assess the cost-effectiveness of primary or secondary care community-based interventions for people with complex emotional needs who meet criteria for a diagnosis of personality disorder to inform healthcare policy-making.

Systematic review (PROSPERO: CRD42020134068) of databases. We included economic evaluations of interventions for adults with complex emotional needs associated with a diagnosis of personality disorder in community mental health settings published before 18 September 2019. Study quality was assessed using the CHEERS statement.

Eighteen studies were included. The studies mainly evaluated psychotherapeutic interventions. Studies were also identified that evaluated altering the setting in which care was delivered and joint crisis plans. No strong economic evidence to support a single intervention or model of community-based care was identified.

Robust economic evidence to support a single intervention or model of community-based care for people with complex emotional needs is lacking. The strongest evidence was for dialectical behaviour therapy, with all three identified studies indicating that it is likely to be cost-effective in community settings compared with treatment as usual. More robust evidence is required on the cost-effectiveness of community-based interventions on which decision makers can confidently base guidelines or allocate resources. The evidence should be based on consistent measures of costs and outcomes with sufficient sample sizes to demonstrate impacts on these.

Structural models of psychopathology consistently identify internalizing (INT) and externalizing (EXT) specific factors as well as a superordinate factor that captures their shared variance, the p factor. Questions remain, however, about the meaning of these data-driven dimensions and the interpretability and distinguishability of the larger nomological networks in which they are embedded.

The sample consisted of 10 645 youth aged 9–10 years participating in the multisite Adolescent Brain and Cognitive Development (ABCD) Study. p, INT, and EXT were modeled using the parent-rated Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL). Patterns of associations were examined with variables drawn from diverse domains including demographics, psychopathology, temperament, family history of substance use and psychopathology, school and family environment, and cognitive ability, using instruments based on youth-, parent-, and teacher-report, and behavioral task performance.

p exhibited a broad pattern of statistically significant associations with risk variables across all domains assessed, including temperament, neurocognition, and social adversity. The specific factors exhibited more domain-specific patterns of associations, with INT exhibiting greater fear/distress and EXT exhibiting greater impulsivity.

In this largest study of hierarchical models of psychopathology to date, we found that p, INT, and EXT exhibit well-differentiated nomological networks that are interpretable in terms of neurocognition, impulsivity, fear/distress, and social adversity. These networks were, in contrast, obscured when relying on the a priori Internalizing and Externalizing dimensions of the CBCL scales. Our findings add to the evidence for the validity of p, INT, and EXT as theoretically and empirically meaningful broad psychopathology liabilities.

To make informed choices, patients need information about negative as well as positive effects of treatments. There is little information about negative effects of psychological interventions.

To determine the prevalence of and risk factors for perceived negative effects of psychological treatment for common mental disorders.

Cross-sectional survey of people receiving psychological treatment from 184 services in England and Wales. Respondents were asked whether they had experienced lasting bad effects from the treatment they received.

Of 14 587 respondents, 763 (5.2%) reported experiencing lasting bad effects. People aged over 65 were less likely to report such effects and sexual and ethnic minorities were more likely to report them. People who were unsure what type of therapy they received were more likely to report negative effects (odds ratio (OR) = 1.51, 95% CI 1.22–1.87), and those that stated that they were given enough information about therapy before it started were less likely to report them (OR = 0.65, 95% CI 0.54–0.79).

One in 20 people responding to this survey reported lasting bad effects from psychological treatment. Clinicians should discuss the potential for both the positive and negative effects of therapy before it starts.