14 research outputs found

    Mental health at different stages of cancer survival: a natural language processing study of Reddit posts

    Get PDF
    IntroductionThe purpose of this study was to use text-based social media content analysis from cancer-specific subreddits to evaluate depression and anxiety-loaded content. Natural language processing, automatic, and lexicon-based methods were employed to perform sentiment analysis and identify depression and anxiety-loaded content.MethodsData was collected from 187 Reddit users who had received a cancer diagnosis, were currently undergoing treatment, or had completed treatment. Participants were split according to survivorship status into short-term, transition, and long-term cancer survivors. A total of 72524 posts were analyzed across the three cancer survivor groups.ResultsThe results showed that short-term cancer survivors had significantly more depression-loaded posts and more anxiety-loaded words than long-term survivors, with no significant differences relative to the transition period. The topic analysis showed that long-term survivors, more than other stages of survivorship, have resources to share their experiences with suicidal ideation and mental health issues while providing support to their survivor community.DiscussionThe results indicate that Reddit texts seem to be an indicator of when the stressor is active and mental health issues are triggered. This sets the stage for Reddit to become a platform for screening and first-hand intervention delivery. Special attention should be dedicated to short-term survivors

    Predictors and moderators of outcome of psychotherapeutic interventions for mental disorders in adolescents and young adults : protocol for systematic reviews

    Get PDF
    Background: Adolescence and young adulthood is a risk period for the emergence of mental disorders. There is strong evidence that psychotherapeutic interventions are effective for most mental disorders. However, very little is known about which of the different psychotherapeutic treatment modalities are effective for whom. This large systematic review aims to address this critical gap within the literature on non-specific predictors and moderators of the outcomes of psychotherapeutic interventions among adolescents and young adults with mental disorders. Methods: The protocol is being reported in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P) Statement. PubMed and PsycINFO databases will be searched for randomized controlled and quasi-experimental/naturalistic clinical trials. Risk of bias of all included studies will be assessed by the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. The quality of predictor and moderator variables will be also assessed. A narrative synthesis will be conducted for all included studies. Discussion: This systematic review will strengthen the evidence base on effective mental health interventions for young people, being the first to explore predictors and moderators of outcome of psychotherapeutic interventions for a wide range of mental disorders in young people.Peer reviewe

    Subjective well-being among psychotherapists during the coronavirus disease pandemic : A cross-cultural survey from 12 european countries

    Get PDF
    Objective: The aim of this study is to examine the amount of the total variance of the subjective well-being (SWB) of psychotherapists from 12 European countries explained by between-country vs. between-person differences regarding its cognitive (life satisfaction) and affective components (positive affect [PA] and negative affect [NA]). Second, we explored a link between the SWB and their personal (self-efficacy) and social resources (social support) after controlling for sociodemographics, work characteristics, and COVID-19-related distress.Methods: In total, 2915 psychotherapists from 12 countries (Austria, Bulgaria, Cyprus, Finland, Great Britain, Serbia, Spain, Norway, Poland, Romania, Sweden, and Switzerland) participated in this study. The participants completed the Satisfaction with Life Scale (SWLS), the International Positive and Negative Affect Schedule Short Form (I-PANAS-SF), the General Self-Efficacy Scale, and the Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support.Results: Cognitive well-being (CWB; satisfaction with life) was a more country-dependent component of SWB than affective well-being (AWB). Consequently, at the individual level, significant correlates were found only for AWB but not for CWB. Higher AWB was linked to being female, older age, higher weekly workload, and lower COVID-19-related distress. Self-efficacy and social support explained AWB only, including their main effects and the moderating effect of self-efficacy.Conclusions: The results highlight more individual characteristics of AWB compared to CWB, with a more critical role of low self-efficacy for the link between social support and PA rather than NA. This finding suggests the need for greater self-care among psychotherapists regarding their AWB and the more complex conditions underlying their CWB.Peer reviewe

    A comprehensive meta-analysis of interpretation biases in depression

    No full text
    Interpretation biases are theorized to play a central role in depression. Yet, the strength of the empirical evidence for this bias remains a topic of debate. This meta-analysis aimed to estimate the overall effect size and to identify moderators relevant to theory and methodology. PsycINFO, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, PubMed, and dissertation databases were searched. A random-effects meta-analysis was performed on 87 studies (N=9,443). Results revealed a medium overall effect size (g=0.72, 95%-CI:[0.62;0.82]). Equivalent effect sizes were observed for patients diagnosed with clinical depression (g=0.60, 95%-CI:[0.37;0.75]), patients remitted from depression (g=0.59, 95%-CI:[0.33;0.86]), and undiagnosed individuals reporting elevated depressive symptoms (g=0.66, 95%-CI:[0.47;0.84]). The effect size was larger for self-referential stimuli (g=0.90, 95%-CI[0.78;1.01]), but was not modified by the presence (g=0.74, 95%-CI[0.59;0.90]) or absence (g=0.72, 95%-CI[0.58;0.85]) of mental imagery instructions. Similar effect sizes were observed for a negative interpretation bias (g=0.58, 95%-CI:[0.40;0.75]) and lack of a positive interpretation bias (g=0.60, 95%-CI:[0.36;0.85]). The effect size was only significant when interpretation bias was measured directly (g=0.88, 95%-CI[0.77;0.99]), but not when measured indirectly (g=0.04, 95%-CI[-0.14;0.22]). It is concluded that depression is associated with interpretation biases, but caution is necessary because methodological factors shape conclusions. Implications and recommendations for future research are outlined

    Is there a sleeper effect of exposure-based vs. cognitive-only intervention for anxiety disorders? A longitudinal multilevel meta-analysis

    Full text link
    There is a longstanding debate in the cognitive behavioral literature whether exposure-based methods produce more sustainable outcomes relative to cognitive methods or vice versa. This debate concerns particularly the time after treatment termination (at follow-up assessments), also referred to as the sleeper effect. Therefore, the aim of the current meta-analysis was to examine the enduring efficacy of Exposure Therapy (ET) in comparison to Cognitive Therapy (CT) from treatment termination to follow-up in anxiety disorders. Available literature also allowed for the assessment of their long-term additive benefits relative to ET only. Traditional random effects analyses with restricted maximum likelihood estimators and multilevel longitudinal analyses were conducted on 39 randomized controlled trials (N = 1878). Traditional analyses revealed no differential efficacy at post-treatment or follow-up. Similarly, the multilevel longitudinal analyses identified no differential growth in efficacy from treatment termination to follow-up. The majority of the variables investigated did not moderate the results. However, there was evidence suggesting that CT was superior to ET when treatment was delivered individually, while ET was superior to CT when delivered as group therapy. Overall, the findings did not validate a number of assumptions, such as the existence of a sleeper effect. Several strengths and limitations are further discussed in the paper

    Optimal attentional focus during exposure in specific phobia: a meta-analysis

    No full text
    Over the last 30 years, researchers have disagreed over the consequences of diverting attention from threat for exposure efficacy, which is an important theoretical and clinical debate. Therefore, the present meta-analysis assessed the efficacy of attentionally focused exposure against distracted and attentionally uninstructed exposure regarding distress, behavioral, and physiological outcomes. We included 15 randomized studies with specific phobia, totaling 444 participants and targeting outcomes at post-exposure and follow-up. Results indicated no difference between the efficacy of distracted exposure as opposed to focused or uninstructed exposure for distress and physiology. For behavior, at post-exposure, results were marginally significant in favor of distracted as opposed to focused exposure, while at follow-up results significantly favored distraction. However, concerning behavior, uninstructed exposure was superior to distraction. Moderation analyses revealed that, regarding distress reduction and approach behavior, distracted exposure significantly outperformed focused exposure when the distracter was interactive (g = 1.010/g = 1.128) and exposure was spread over the course of multiple sessions (g = 1.527/g = 1.606). No moderation analysis was significant for physiological measures. These findings suggest that distraction during exposure could be less counterproductive than previously considered and even beneficial under certain circumstances. Theoretical implications and future directions for research are discussed

    Predictors and moderators of outcome of psychotherapeutic interventions for mental disorders in adolescents and young adults: protocol for systematic reviews

    No full text
    Background: Adolescence and young adulthood is a risk period for the emergence of mental disorders. There is strong evidence that psychotherapeutic interventions are effective for most mental disorders. However, very little is known about which of the different psychotherapeutic treatment modalities are effective for whom. This large systematic review aims to address this critical gap within the literature on non-specific predictors and moderators of the outcomes of psychotherapeutic interventions among adolescents and young adults with mental disorders. Methods: The protocol is being reported in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P) Statement. PubMed and PsycINFO databases will be searched for randomized controlled and quasi-experimental/naturalistic clinical trials. Risk of bias of all included studies will be assessed by the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. The quality of predictor and moderator variables will be also assessed. A narrative synthesis will be conducted for all included studies. Discussion: This systematic review will strengthen the evidence base on effective mental health interventions for young people, being the first to explore predictors and moderators of outcome of psychotherapeutic interventions for a wide range of mental disorders in young people
    corecore