A many-analysts approach to the relation between religiosity and well-being

The relation between religiosity and well-being is one of the most researched topics in the psychology of religion, yet the directionality and robustness of the effect remains debated. Here, we adopted a many-analysts approach to assess the robustness of this relation based on a new cross-cultural dataset (N=10,535 participants from 24 countries). We recruited 120 analysis teams to investigate (1) whether religious people self-report higher well-being, and (2) whether the relation between religiosity and self-reported well-being depends on perceived cultural norms of religion (i.e., whether it is considered normal and desirable to be religious in a given country). In a two-stage procedure, the teams first created an analysis plan and then executed their planned analysis on the data. For the first research question, all but 3 teams reported positive effect sizes with credible/confidence intervals excluding zero (median reported β=0.120). For the second research question, this was the case for 65% of the teams (median reported β=0.039). While most teams applied (multilevel) linear regression models, there was considerable variability in the choice of items used to construct the independent variables, the dependent variable, and the included covariates

Epidemiology: Extent of the Problem

Peritoneal carcinomatosis (PC) most commonly represents local or regional evolution of an abdominal carcinoma. Sometimes it can be synchronous with the primary tumor (primary carcinomatosis) but more often is present as recurrent disease (metachronous or secondary) after first-line treatment of the originating tumor. Patients with tumors from colon, ovary, and stomach cancer are more likely to present with PC during their clinical course. Less frequently, other abdominal malignancies, such as uterus, pancreas, small bowel, biliary, or urinary tract, can involve the peritoneum. Tumors originating from the peritoneum itself are definitely rarer: mesothelioma, pseudomyxoma peritonei (PMP), primitive peritoneal carcinoma, and desmoplastic small-round-cell tumor. PC from extra-abdominal tumors, such as lung, breast, melanoma, or peritoneal sarcomatosis, is exceptional, and few epidemiological data are available on them. Statistical analysis of worldwide cancer incidence, prevalence, and mortality rate is available on GLOBOCAN 2012 [1]. In Italy, most epidemiological data are available in the reports from the Italian Association of Tumor Registries (AIRTUM) [2], which collects data regarding incidence, prevalence, and mortality rates from all local and regional tumor registries, covering at least 34% of total population. This data is considered a high-quality regional coverage by and international ranking system (GLOBOCAN 2012 rate B)

Obesity effects on depression: systematic review of epidemiological studies

Background: Obesity is a well-known cause of cardiovascular disease burden and premature death, but effects on psychological morbidity remain uncertain. This article reports findings following a systematic review of epidemiological studies to determine whether obesity causes depression. Methods: Multiple databases were searched for English-language studies of etiology of obesity (exposure variable, analyzed as an ordered category) on depression outcomes (dependent variables, continuous or categorical). Studies in children and in women during pregnancy or postpartum were excluded, as were nonrepresentative cross-sectional studies. Searches and identification of studies for inclusion were performed by EA, whereas a descriptive synthesis of important study characteristics was undertaken independently by us. Results: We reviewed 24 out of approximately 4500 potentially relevant studies; 4 were prospective cohort studies and 20 were cross-sectional studies (10 from the United States). Effect measures reported in all prospective cohort studies were consistent and suggested that obesity may increase the odds of future depression outcomes (symptoms or nonclinical diagnosis of depression). Effect measures reported in most cross-sectional studies from the United States supported the hypothesized association between obesity and prevalence of depression outcomes for women but not men, in contrast most cross-sectional studies from populations other than the United States consistently failed to find such associations. Conclusions: Overall, there is a weak level of evidence supporting the hypothesis that obesity increases the incidence of depression outcomes. Few high-quality prospective cohort studies exist, and cross-sectional studies account for the vast body of published evidence, and therefore firm conclusions for causality cannot yet be drawn. Our finding warrants additional high-quality etiological research on this topic.E Atlantis and M Bake