Despite increasing knowledge on the neuroimaging patterns of eating disorder (ED) symptoms in non-clinical populations, studies using whole-brain machine learning to identify connectome-based neuromarkers of ED symptomatology are absent. This study examined the association of connectivity within and between large-scale functional networks with specific symptomatic behaviors and cognitions using connectome-based predictive modeling (CPM).

CPM with ten-fold cross-validation was carried out to probe functional networks that were predictive of ED-associated symptomatology, including body image concerns, binge eating, and compensatory behaviors, within the discovery sample of 660 participants. The predictive ability of the identified networks was validated using an independent sample of 821 participants.

The connectivity predictive of body image concerns was identified within and between networks implicated in cognitive control (frontoparietal and medial frontal), reward sensitivity (subcortical), and visual perception (visual). Crucially, the set of connections in the positive network related to body image concerns identified in one sample was generalized to predict body image concerns in an independent sample, suggesting the replicability of this effect.

These findings point to the feasibility of using the functional connectome to predict ED symptomatology in the general population and provide the first evidence that functional interplay among distributed networks predicts body shape/weight concerns.

Obsessive-compulsive personality disorder (OCPD) is a high-prevalence personality disorder characterized by subtle but stable interpersonal dysfunction. There have been only limited studies addressing the behavioral patterns and cognitive features of OCPD in interpersonal contexts. The purpose of this study was to investigate how behaviors differ between OCPD individuals and healthy controls (HCs) in the context of guilt-related interpersonal responses.

A total of 113 participants were recruited, including 46 who were identified as having OCPD and 67 HCs. Guilt-related interpersonal responses were manipulated and measured with two social interactive tasks: the Guilt Aversion Task, to assess how anticipatory guilt motivates cooperation; and the Guilt Compensation Task, to assess how experienced guilt induces compensation behaviors. The guilt aversion model and Fehr–Schmidt inequity aversion model were adopted to analyze decision-making in the Guilt Aversion Task and the Guilt Compensation Task, respectively.

Computational model-based results demonstrated that, compared with HCs, the OCPD group exhibited less guilt aversion when making cooperative decisions as well as less guilt-induced compensation after harming others.

Our findings indicate that individuals with OCPD tend to be less affected by guilt than HCs. These impairments in guilt-related responses may prevent adjustments in behaviors toward compliance with social norms and thus result in interpersonal dysfunctions.

Since December 2019, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has been discovered in Wuhan and spread rapidly across China and worldwide. Characteristics of infected patients are needed to get insight into the full spectrum of the disease.

Epidemiological and clinical information of 1738 diagnosed patients during February 7-26, 2020 in Wuhan Dongxihu Fangcang Hospital were analyzed. A total of 709 patients were followed up on symptom, mental health, isolation site, and medication after discharge.

There were 852 males and 886 females in the cohort. The average age of the patients was 48.8 y. A total of 79.98% of the patients were from Wuhan, Hubei Province. The most common initial symptoms were fever, cough, and shortness of breath. Among all the patients, 1463 had complications, with respiratory distress as the most common complication. The average duration of hospitalization was 15.95 ± 14.69 d. The most common postdischarge symptom is cough. After discharge, most patients were full of energy and chose hotel as their self-isolation site. Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) Chinese medicine No.2 prescription is the medication used most commonly by the patients after discharge.

The population is generally susceptible to SARS-CoV-2. After receiving aggressive treatment of combined Chinese and Western medicine, most patients had a good prognosis and mental health after discharge.

More than 50% patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) have severe functional impairment. The restoration of patient functioning is a critical therapeutic goal among patients with MDD. We conducted a systematic review and network meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy of pharmacological treatments on self-rated functional outcomes using the Sheehan Disability Scale in adults with MDD in randomized clinical trials.

PubMed, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched from inception to December 10, 2019. Summary statistics are reported as weighted mean differences with 95% confidence intervals. Interventions were ranked using the surface under the cumulative ranking probabilities.

We included 42 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) (n = 18 998) evaluating the efficacy of 13 different pharmacological treatments on functional outcomes, as measured by the Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS). Duloxetine was the most effective pharmacological agent on functional outcomes, followed by (ranked by efficacy): paroxetine, levomilnacipran, venlafaxine, quetiapine, desvenlafaxine, agomelatine, escitalopram, amitriptyline, bupropion, sertraline, vortioxetine, and fluoxetine. Serotonin and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors were more effective than other drug classes. Additionally, the comparison-adjusted funnel plot suggested the publication bias between small and large studies was relatively low.

Our results indicate that there may be differences across antidepressant agents and classes with respect to self-reported functional outcomes. Validation and replication of these findings in large-scale RCTs are warranted. Our research results will be clinically useful for guiding psychiatrists in treating patients with MDD and functional impairment. PROSPERO registration number CRD42018116663.

This study aimed to explore the impacts of COVID-19 outbreak on mental health status in general population in different affected areas in China.

This was a comparative study including two groups of participants: (1) general population in an online survey in Ya'an and Jingzhou cities during the COVID-19 outbreak from 10–20 February 2020; and (2) matching general population selected from the mental health survey in Ya'an in 2019 (from January to May 2019). General Health Questionnaire (GHQ-12), Self-rating Anxiety Scale (SAS), and Self-rating Depression Scale (SDS) were used.

There were 1775 participants (Ya'an in 2019 and 2020: 537 respectively; Jingzhou in 2020: 701). Participants in Ya'an had a significantly higher rate of general health problems (GHQ scores ⩾3) in 2020 (14.7%) than in 2019 (5.2%) (p < 0.001). Compared with Ya'an (8.0%), participants in Jingzhou in 2020 had a significantly higher rate of anxiety (SAS scores ⩾50, 24.1%) (p < 0.001). Participants in Ya'an in 2020 had a significantly higher rate of depression (SDS scores ⩾53, 55.3%) than in Jingzhou (16.3%) (p < 0.001). The risk factors of anxiety symptoms included female, number of family members (⩾6 persons), and frequent outdoor activities. The risk factors of depression symptoms included participants in Ya'an and uptake self-protective measures.

The prevalence of psychological symptoms has increased sharply in general population during the COVID-19 outbreak. People in COVID-19 severely affected areas may have higher scores of GHQ and anxiety symptoms. Culture-specific and individual-based psychosocial interventions should be developed for those in need during the COVID-19 outbreak.

The disease burden of infectious diarrhea cannot be underestimated. Its seasonal patterns indicate that weather patterns may play an important role and have an important effect on it. The objective of this study was to clarify the relationship between temperature and infectious diarrhea, and diarrhea-like illness.

Distributed lag non-linear model, which was based on the definition of a cross-basis, was used to examine the effect.

Viral diarrhea usually had high incidence in autumn-winter and spring with a peak at -6°C; Norovirus circulated throughout the year with an insignificant peak at 8°C, while related bacteria usually tested positive in summer and peaked at 22°C. The lag-response curve of the proportion of diarrhea-like cases in outpatient and emergency cases revealed that at -6°C, with the lag days increasing, the proportion increased. Similar phenomena were observed at the beginning of the curves of virus and bacterial positive rate, showing that the risk increased as the lag days increased, peaking on days 16 and 9, respectively. The shape of lag-response curve of norovirus positive rate was different from others, presenting m-type, with 2 peaks on day 3 and day 18.

Weather patterns should be taken into account when developing surveillance programs and formulating relevant public health intervention strategies.

The COVID-19 outbreak required the significantly increased working time and intensity for health professionals in China, which may cause stress signs.

From March 2–13 of 2020, 4,618 health professionals in China were included in an anonymous, self-rated online survey regarding their concerns on exposure to the COVID-19 outbreak. The questionnaires consisted of five parts: basic demographic information and epidemiological exposure; occupational and psychological impact; concerns during the episode; coping strategies; and the Huaxi Emotional-Distress Index (HEI).

About 24.2% of respondents experienced high levels of anxiety or/and depressive symptoms since the COVID-19 outbreak. Respondents who worried about their physical health and those who had COVID-19 infected friends or close relatives were more likely to have high HEI levels, than those without these characteristics. Further, family relationship was found to have an independent protective effect against high HEI levels. Their main concerns were that their families would not be cared for and that they would not be able to work properly. Compared to respondents with clear emotional problems, those with somewhat hidden emotional issues adopted more positive coping measures.

About a quarter of medical staff experienced psychological problems during the pandemic of COVID-19. The psychological impact of stressful events was related to worrying about their physical health, having close COVID-19 infected acquaintances and family relationship issues. Therefore, the psychological supprot for medical staff fighting in the COVID-19 pandemic may be needed.

This study aimed to examine the efficacy of combining paroxetine and mirtazapine v. switching to mirtazapine, for patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) who have had an insufficient response to SSRI monotherapy (paroxetine) after the first 2 weeks of treatment.

This double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, three-arm study recruited participants from five hospitals in China. Eligible participants were aged 18–60 years with MDD of at least moderate severity. Participants received paroxetine during a 2-week open-label phase and patients who had not achieved early improvement were randomized to paroxetine, mirtazapine or paroxetine combined with mirtazapine for 6 weeks. The primary outcome was improvement on the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression 17-item (HAMD-17) scores 6 weeks after randomization.

A total of 204 patients who showed early non-response to paroxetine monotherapy were randomly assigned to receive either mirtazapine and placebo (n = 68), paroxetine and placebo (n = 68) or mirtazapine and paroxetine (n = 68), with 164 patients completing the outcome assessment. At week 8, the least squares (LS) mean change of HAMD-17 scores did not significantly differ among the three groups, (12.98 points) in the mirtazapine group, (12.50 points) in the paroxetine group and (13.27 points) in the mirtazapine plus paroxetine combination group. Participants in the paroxetine monotherapy group were least likely to experience adverse effects.

After 8 weeks follow-up, paroxetine monotherapy, mirtazapine monotherapy and paroxetine/mirtazapine combination therapy were equally effective in non-improvers at 2 weeks. The results of this trial do not support a recommendation to routinely offer additional treatment or a switch in treatment strategies for MDD patients who do not show early improvement after 2 weeks of antidepressant treatment.

To explore whether and how group cognitive-behavioural therapy (GCBT) plus medication differs from medication alone for the treatment of generalised anxiety disorder (GAD).

Hundred and seventy patients were randomly assigned to the GCBT plus duloxetine (n=89) or duloxetine group (n=81). The primary outcomes were Hamilton Anxiety Scale (HAMA) response and remission rates. The explorative secondary measures included score reductions from baseline in the HAMA total, psychic, and somatic anxiety subscales (HAMA-PA, HAMA-SA), the Hamilton Depression Scale, the Severity Subscale of Clinical Global Impression Scale, Global Assessment of Functioning, and the 12-item Short-Form Health Survey. Assessments were conducted at baseline, 4-week, 8-week, and 3-month follow-up.

At 4 weeks, HAMA response (GCBT group 57.0% vs. control group 24.4%, p=0.000, Cohen’s d=0.90) and remission rates (GCBT group 21.5% vs. control group 6.2%, p=0.004; d=0.51), and most secondary outcomes (all p<0.05, d=0.36−0.77) showed that the combined therapy was superior. At 8 weeks, all the primary and secondary significant differences found at 4 weeks were maintained with smaller effect sizes (p<0.05, d=0.32−0.48). At 3-month follow-up, the combined therapy was only significantly superior in the HAMA total (p<0.045, d=0.43) and HAMA-PA score reductions (p<0.001, d=0.77). Logistic regression showed superiority of the combined therapy for HAMA response rates [odds ratio (OR)=2.12, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.02−4.42, p=0.04] and remission rates (OR=2.80, 95% CI 1.27−6.16, p=0.01).

Compared with duloxetine alone, GCBT plus duloxetine showed significant treatment response for GAD over a shorter period of time, particularly for psychic anxiety symptoms, which may suggest that GCBT was effective in changing cognitive style.