Homeless street children in Nepal : use of allostatic load to assess the burden of childhood adversity.

As challenges to child well-being through economic disadvantage, family disruption, and migration or displacement escalate world wide, the need for cross-culturally robust understanding of childhood adversity proportionately increases. Toward this end, developmental risk was assessed in four contrasting groups of 107 Nepali children ages 10–14 years that represent distinctive, common conditions in which contemporary children grow up. Relative cumulative burden (allostatic load) indexed by multiple dimensions of physical and psychosocial stress was ascertained among homeless street boys and three family-based groups, from poor urban squatter settlements, urban middle class, and a remote rural village. Biomarkers of stress and vulnerability to stress included growth status, salivary cortisol, antibodies to Epstein–Barr virus, acute phase inflammatory responses (alpha1-antichymotrypsin), and cardiovascular fitness and reactivity (flex heart rate and pressor response). Individual biomarkers of risk and allostatic load differed markedly among groups, were highest in villagers, and varied by components of allostatic load. Such data suggest a need for critical appraisal of homelessness and migration as a risk factor to youth, given prevailing local conditions such as rural poverty, and represents the only multidimensional study of childhood allostatic load and developmental risk in non-Western settings

Measuring the psychosocial, biological, and cognitive signatures of profound stress in humanitarian settings: Impacts, challenges, and strategies in the field

From Springer Nature via Jisc Publications RouterAlastair Ager - ORCID 0000-0002-9474-3563 https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9474-3563Background: Evidence of ‘what works’ in humanitarian programming is important for addressing the disruptive consequences of conflict and forced displacement. However, collecting robust scientific evidence, and ensuring contextual relevance, is challenging. We measured the biological, psychosocial, and cognitive impacts of a structured psychosocial intervention, implemented by Mercy Corps with Syrian refugees and Jordanian host-community youth. In this paper, we present a case analysis of this evaluation study and reflect on the scientific contributions of the work, the challenges experienced in its delivery, and the strategies deployed to address them.Discussion: We identified challenges with respect to study design, methods, and dissemination: these included the logistics and acceptability of implementing a randomized controlled trial in a humanitarian context, the selection and refinement of culturally-relevant research tools and community-based practices, and the dissemination of results to multiple stakeholders. We demonstrated beneficial and sustained impacts on self-reports of insecurity, stress, and mental health; developed a reliable and culturally-relevant measure of resilience; experimentally tested cognitive skills; and showed that levels of cortisol, a biomarker of chronic stress, reduced by one third in response to intervention. Using stress biomarkers offered proof-of-concept evidence, beyond self-reported data: interventions targeting mental health and psychosocial wellbeing can regulate physiological stress in the body as well as improve self-reported mental health and wellbeing. We built constructive dialogue between local communities, scholars, humanitarian practitioners, and policy-makers.Conclusions: Our work shows the value of rigorous research in humanitarian settings, emphasizing relevance for local communities and meaningful ways to build research ownership. Findings encourage the adoption of cognitive measures and stress biomarkers alongside self-report surveys in evaluating programme impacts. High-quality scientific research with youth can be feasible, useful, and ethical in humanitarian settings.pubpu

Population variation in ovarian function

Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/30638/1/0000280.pd

C-reactive protein, Epstein-Barr virus, and cortisol trajectories in refugee and non-refugee youth: Links with stress, mental health, and cognitive function during a randomized controlled trial.

Experiencing childhood adversity has been associated with significant changes in inflammation, cell-mediated immunocompetence, and cortisol secretion. Relatively few studies have examined, longitudinally, alterations to inflammatory processes during adolescence, especially outside Western contexts; none have evaluated biomarker trajectories for at-risk youth in response to a structured behavioral intervention. We conducted a randomized controlled trial evaluating the efficacy of a humanitarian intervention targeting stress-alleviation, with 12-18 year-old Syrian refugees (n = 446) and Jordanian non-refugees (n = 371) living side-by-side in war-affected communities in Jordan. We measured C-reactive protein (CRP), Epstein-Barr virus antibodies (EBV), and hair cortisol concentration (HCC) at three timepoints (pre/post intervention and 11 month follow-up), and assessed three main outcomes (psychosocial stress, mental health, and cognitive function). Using growth mixture models, regressions, and growth curve models, we identified three distinct trajectories for CRP, two for EBV, and three for HCC, and examined their associations with age, gender, BMI, poverty, and trauma. We found associations with BMI for CRP, refugee status for EBV, and BMI and gender with HCC trajectory. In terms of health outcomes, we found associations between rising CRP levels and perceived stress (B =  -2.92, p = .007), and between HCC hypersecretion and insecurity (B = 7.21, p = .017). In terms of responses to the intervention, we observed no differential impacts by CRP or EBV trajectories, unlike HCC. These results suggest that commonly-assayed biomarkers do not associate with health outcomes and respond to targeted interventions in straightforward ways. Our study is the first to examine multiple biomarker trajectories in war-affected adolescents, in order to better evaluate the extent, timing, and malleability of the biological signatures of poverty, conflict, and forced displacement

Relevance or Excellence? Setting Research Priorities for Mental Health and Psychosocial Support in Humanitarian Settings

Background: Humanitarian crises are associated with an increase in mental disorders and psychological distress. Despite the emerging consensus on intervention strategies in humanitarian settings, the field of mental health and psychosocial support (MHPSS) in humanitarian settings lacks a consensus-based research agenda. Methods: From August 2009 to February 2010, we contacted policymakers, academic researchers, and humanitarian aid workers, and conducted nine semistructured focus group discussions with 114 participants in three locations (Peru, Uganda, and Nepal), in both the capitals and remote humanitarian settings. Local stakeholders representing a range of academic expertise (psychiatry, psychology, social work, child protection, and medical anthropology) and organizations (governments, universities, nongovernmental organizations, and UN agencies) were asked to identify priority questions for MHPSS research in humanitarian settings, and to discuss factors that hamper and facilitate research. Results: Thematic analyses of transcripts show that participants broadly agreed on prioritized research themes in the following order: (1) the prevalence and burden of mental health and psychosocial difficulties in humanitarian settings, (2) how MHPSS implementation can be improved, (3) evaluation of specific MHPSS interventions, (4) the determinants of mental health and psychological distress, and (5) improved research methods and processes. Rather than differences in research themes across countries, what emerged was a disconnect between different groups of stakeholders regarding research processes: the perceived lack of translation of research findings into actual policy and programs; misunderstanding of research methods by aid workers; different appreciation of the time needed to conduct research; and disputed universality of research constructs. Conclusions: To advance a collaborative research agenda, actors in this field need to bridge the perceived disconnect between the goals of “relevance” and “excellence.” Research needs to be more sensitive to questions and concerns arising from humanitarian interventions, and practitioners need to take research findings into account in designing interventions. (Harv Rev Psychiatry 2012;20:25–36.

Improving mental health and psychosocial wellbeing in humanitarian settings: Reflections on research funded through R2HC

From Springer Nature via Jisc Publications RouterMajor knowledge gaps remain concerning the most effective ways to address mental health and psychosocial needs of populations affected by humanitarian crises. The Research for Health in Humanitarian Crisis (R2HC) program aims to strengthen humanitarian health practice and policy through research. As a significant portion of R2HC’s research has focused on mental health and psychosocial support interventions, the program has been interested in strengthening a community of practice in this field. Following a meeting between grantees, we set out to provide an overview of the R2HC portfolio, and draw lessons learned. In this paper, we discuss the mental health and psychosocial support-focused research projects funded by R2HC; review the implications of initial findings from this research portfolio; and highlight four remaining knowledge gaps in this field. Between 2014 and 2019, R2HC funded 18 academic-practitioner partnerships focused on mental health and psychosocial support, comprising 38% of the overall portfolio (18 of 48 projects) at a value of approximately 7.2 million GBP. All projects have focused on evaluating the impact of interventions. In line with consensus-based recommendations to consider a wide range of mental health and psychosocial needs in humanitarian settings, research projects have evaluated diverse interventions. Findings so far have both challenged and confirmed widely-held assumptions about the effectiveness of mental health and psychosocial interventions in humanitarian settings. They point to the importance of building effective, sustained, and diverse partnerships between scholars, humanitarian practitioners, and funders, to ensure long-term program improvements and appropriate evidence-informed decision making. Further research needs to fill knowledge gaps regarding how to: scale-up interventions that have been found to be effective (e.g., questions related to integration across sectors, adaptation of interventions across different contexts, and optimal care systems); address neglected mental health conditions and populations (e.g., elderly, people with disabilities, sexual minorities, people with severe, pre-existing mental disorders); build on available local resources and supports (e.g., how to build on traditional, religious healing and community-wide social support practices); and ensure equity, quality, fidelity, and sustainability for interventions in real-world contexts (e.g., answering questions about how interventions from controlled studies can be transferred to more representative humanitarian contexts).All studies described here were funded by Elrha’s Research for Health in Humanitarian Crises (R2HC) Programme, which aims to improve health outcomes by strengthening the evidence base for public health interventions in humanitarian crises.14pubpu

Understanding the protective effect of social support on depression symptomatology from a longitudinal network perspective

Background: Higher social support protects people from developing mental disorders. Limited evidence is available on the mechanism through which social support plays this protective role. Objective: To investigate the stress-buffering process of social support on depressive symptoms using a novel longitudinal dynamic symptom network approach. Methods: A total of 4242 adult participants who completed the first two waves (from May to October 2020) of the International Covid Mental Health Survey were included in the study. Cross-lagged panel network modelling was used to estimate a longitudinal network of self-reported social support, loneliness and depressive symptoms. Standardised regression coefficients from regularised cross-lagged regressions were estimated as edge weights of the network. Findings: The results support a unidirectional protective effect of social support on key depressive symptoms, partly mediated through loneliness: A higher number of close confidants and accessible practical help was associated with decreased anhedonia (weight=-0.033) and negative self-appraisal symptoms (weight=-0.038). Support from others was also negatively associated with loneliness, which in turn associated with decreased depressed mood (weight=0.086) and negative self-appraisal (weight=0.077). We identified a greater number of direct relationships from social support to depressive symptoms among men compared with women. Also, the edge weights from social support to depression were generally stronger in the men's network. Conclusions: Reductions in negative self-appraisal might function as a bridge between social support and other depressive symptoms, and, thus, it may have amplified the protective effect of social support. Men appear to benefit more from social support than women. Clinical implications: Building community-based support networks to deliver practical support, and loneliness reduction components are critical for depression prevention interventions after stressful experiences