Primary group size, social support, gender and future mental health status in a prospective study of people living in private households throughout Great Britain

Background. Structural characteristics of social networks such as primary group size have received less attention than measures of perceived social support. Previous research suggests that associations between social network size and later common mental disorder status may differ according to sex and initial mental state. Method. Adults participating in the 2000 British National Household Survey of psychiatric morbidity were randomly selected for follow-up 18 months later. The revised Clinical Interview Schedule (CIS-R) and the Interview Measure of Social Relations (IMSR) were administered at baseline and follow-up. Primary group size was defined as the total number of close relatives and friends. A four-level scale of common mental disorder was modelled with ordinal logistic regression, based on weighted data (n=2413). Findings. After adjusting for confounders, a primary group size of three or less at time 1 predicted worse mental health at time 2. This effect was greatest in men who were initially non-cases at baseline (averaged odds 4.5) and in women who were initially cases at baseline (average odds 2.9). Primary group size at time 2 was significantly predicted by level of common mental disorder at time 1 in women but not in men. Thus, confounding by baseline disorder does not explain risk of developing poor mental health in socially isolated men. Conclusion. This study replicates the strong effects of primary group size on future mental health that emerge when men and women are studied separately and when subjects are categorized according to baseline mental health status

The population impact of common mental disorders and long-term physical conditions on disability and hospital admission

Background: Long-term physical conditions (LTCs) consume the largest share of healthcare budgets. Although common mental disorders (CMDs) and LTCs often co-occur, the potential impact of improved mental health treatment on severe disability and hospital admissions for physical health problems remains unknown. Method: A cross-sectional study of 7403 adults aged 16–95 years living in private households in England was performed. LTCs were ascertained by prompted self-report. CMDs were ascertained by structured clinical interview. Disability was assessed using questions about problems with activities of daily living. Population impact and potential preventive gain were estimated using population-attributable fraction (PAF), and conservative estimates were obtained using ‘treated non-cases’ as the reference group. Results: Of the respondents, 20.7% reported at least one LTC. The prevalence of CMDs increased with the number of LTCs, but over two-thirds (71.2%) of CMD cases in people with LTCs were untreated. Statistically significant PAFs were found for CMDs and recent hospital admission [13.5%, 95% confidence intervals (CI) 6.6–20.0] and severe disability (31.3%, 95% CI 27.1–35.2) after adjusting for LTCs and other confounders. Only the latter remained significant when using the most conservative estimate of PAF (21.8%, 95% CI 14.0–28.9), and this was reduced only slightly when considering only participants with LTCs (18.5%, 95% CI 7.9–27.9). Conclusions: Better treatments for CMDs in people with LTCs could achieve almost the same population health gain in terms of reducing severe disability as those targeted at the entire population. Interventions to reduce the prevalence of CMDs among people with LTCs should be part of routine medical care

Discrimination, domestic violence, abuse, and other adverse life events in people with epilepsy: Population-based study to assess the burden of these events and their contribution to psychopathology

Objective To quantify the experience of discrimination, domestic violence, abuse, and other stressful life events in people with epilepsy in comparison with the general population and people with other chronic conditions. To assess whether any excess relative burden of these adversities could explain the higher rates of depression in people with epilepsy. Methods The Adult Psychiatric Morbidity Survey 2007 used comprehensive interviews with 7,403 individuals living in private residences in England. Doctor-diagnosed epilepsy and other chronic conditions were established by self-report. Discrimination, domestic violence, physical and sexual abuse, and other stressful life events were assessed using computerized self-completion and a face-to-face interview, respectively. Results People with epilepsy were sevenfold more likely to have reported experiencing discrimination due to health problems (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 7.1; 95% confidence interval [CI] 3.1–16.3), than the general population without epilepsy. This estimate was substantially greater in people with epilepsy than for people with other chronic conditions. People with epilepsy also had greater odds of experiencing domestic violence and sexual abuse than the general population, although these associations were also found in people with other chronic conditions. There was less evidence of an association between epilepsy and a history of physical abuse or having a greater burden of other stressful life events. In exploratory analyses, assuming they lie on the causal pathway, discrimination, domestic violence, and sexual abuse explained 42.7% of the total effect of the relationship between epilepsy and depression or anxiety disorders. Significance People with epilepsy can face a range of psychosocial adversities and extensively report feeling discriminated against as compared to the general population. In addition, if confirmed in longitudinal studies, the results suggest that these psychosocial adversities may have a significant role in the development of psychiatric comorbidity and may be targets for future interventions

Anxiety and Depression in Adults with Autism Spectrum Disorder: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Adults with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) are thought to be at disproportionate risk of developing mental health comorbidities, with anxiety and depression being considered most prominent amongst these. Yet, no systematic review has been carried out to date to examine rates of both anxiety and depression focusing specifically on adults with ASD. This systematic review and meta-analysis examined the rates of anxiety and depression in adults with ASD and the impact of factors such as assessment methods and presence of comorbid intellectual disability (ID) diagnosis on estimated prevalence rates. Electronic database searches for studies published between January 2000 and September 2017 identified a total of 35 studies, including 30 studies measuring anxiety (n = 26 070; mean age = 30.9, s.d. = 6.2 years) and 29 studies measuring depression (n = 26 117; mean age = 31.1, s.d. = 6.8 years). The pooled estimation of current and lifetime prevalence for adults with ASD were 27% and 42% for any anxiety disorder, and 23% and 37% for depressive disorder. Further analyses revealed that the use of questionnaire measures and the presence of ID may significantly influence estimates of prevalence. The current literature suffers from a high degree of heterogeneity in study method and an overreliance on clinical samples. These results highlight the importance of community-based studies and the identification and inclusion of well-characterized samples to reduce heterogeneity and bias in estimates of prevalence for comorbidity in adults with ASD and other populations with complex psychiatric presentations

Debt income and mental disorder in the general population

Background The association between poor mental health and poverty is well known but its mechanism is not fully understood. This study tests the hypothesis that the association between low income and mental disorder is mediated by debt and its attendant financial hardship. Method The study is a cross-sectional nationally representative survey of private households in England, Scotland and Wales, which assessed 8580 participants aged 16–74 years living in general households. Psychosis, neurosis, alcohol abuse and drug abuse were identified by the Clinical Interview Schedule – Revised, the Schedule for Assessment in Neuropsychiatry (SCAN), the Alcohol Use Disorder Identification Test (AUDIT) and other measures. Detailed questions were asked about income, debt and financial hardship. Results Those with low income were more likely to have mental disorder [odds ratio (OR) 2.09, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.68–2.59] but this relationship was attenuated after adjustment for debt (OR 1.58, 95% CI 1.25–1.97) and vanished when other sociodemographic variables were also controlled (OR 1.07, 95% CI 0.77–1.48). Of those with mental disorder, 23% were in debt (compared with 8% of those without disorder), and 10% had had a utility disconnected (compared with 3%). The more debts people had, the more likely they were to have some form of mental disorder, even after adjustment for income and other sociodemographic variables. People with six or more separate debts had a six-fold increase in mental disorder after adjustment for income (OR 6.0, 95% CI 3.5–10.3). Conclusions Both low income and debt are associated with mental illness, but the effect of income appears to be mediated largely by debt

Chronic neuropsychiatric sequelae of SARS-CoV-2: Protocol and methods from the Alzheimer\u27s Association Global Consortium

Introduction Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) has caused \u3e3.5 million deaths worldwide and affected \u3e160 million people. At least twice as many have been infected but remained asymptomatic or minimally symptomatic. COVID‐19 includes central nervous system manifestations mediated by inflammation and cerebrovascular, anoxic, and/or viral neurotoxicity mechanisms. More than one third of patients with COVID‐19 develop neurologic problems during the acute phase of the illness, including loss of sense of smell or taste, seizures, and stroke. Damage or functional changes to the brain may result in chronic sequelae. The risk of incident cognitive and neuropsychiatric complications appears independent from the severity of the original pulmonary illness. It behooves the scientific and medical community to attempt to understand the molecular and/or systemic factors linking COVID‐19 to neurologic illness, both short and long term. Methods This article describes what is known so far in terms of links among COVID‐19, the brain, neurological symptoms, and Alzheimer\u27s disease (AD) and related dementias. We focus on risk factors and possible molecular, inflammatory, and viral mechanisms underlying neurological injury. We also provide a comprehensive description of the Alzheimer\u27s Association Consortium on Chronic Neuropsychiatric Sequelae of SARS‐CoV‐2 infection (CNS SC2) harmonized methodology to address these questions using a worldwide network of researchers and institutions. Results Successful harmonization of designs and methods was achieved through a consensus process initially fragmented by specific interest groups (epidemiology, clinical assessments, cognitive evaluation, biomarkers, and neuroimaging). Conclusions from subcommittees were presented to the whole group and discussed extensively. Presently data collection is ongoing at 19 sites in 12 countries representing Asia, Africa, the Americas, and Europe. Discussion The Alzheimer\u27s Association Global Consortium harmonized methodology is proposed as a model to study long‐term neurocognitive sequelae of SARS‐CoV‐2 infection. Key Points The following review describes what is known so far in terms of molecular and epidemiological links among COVID‐19, the brain, neurological symptoms, and AD and related dementias (ADRD) The primary objective of this large‐scale collaboration is to clarify the pathogenesis of ADRD and to advance our understanding of the impact of a neurotropic virus on the long‐term risk of cognitive decline and other CNS sequelae. No available evidence supports the notion that cognitive impairment after SARS‐CoV‐2 infection is a form of dementia (ADRD or otherwise). The longitudinal methodologies espoused by the consortium are intended to provide data to answer this question as clearly as possible controlling for possible confounders. Our specific hypothesis is that SARS‐CoV‐2 triggers ADRD‐like pathology following the extended olfactory cortical network (EOCN) in older individuals with specific genetic susceptibility. The proposed harmonization strategies and flexible study designs offer the possibility to include large samples of under‐represented racial and ethnic groups, creating a rich set of harmonized cohorts for future studies of the pathophysiology, determinants, long‐term consequences, and trends in cognitive aging, ADRD, and vascular disease. We provide a framework for current and future studies to be carried out within the Consortium. and offers a “green paper” to the research community with a very broad, global base of support, on tools suitable for low‐ and middle‐income countries aimed to compare and combine future longitudinal data on the topic. The Consortium proposes a combination of design and statistical methods as a means of approaching causal inference of the COVID‐19 neuropsychiatric sequelae. We expect that deep phenotyping of neuropsychiatric sequelae may provide a series of candidate syndromes with phenomenological and biological characterization that can be further explored. By generating high‐quality harmonized data across sites we aim to capture both descriptive and, where possible, causal associations

The chronic neuropsychiatric sequelae of COVID?19: The need for a prospective study of viral impact on brain functioning

IntroductionThe increasing evidence of SARS‐CoV‐2 impact on the central nervous system (CNS) raises key questions on its impact for risk of later life cognitive decline, Alzheimer's disease (AD), and other dementia.MethodsThe Alzheimer's Association and representatives from more than 30 countries—with technical guidance from the World Health Organization—have formed an international consortium to study the short‐and long‐term consequences of SARS‐CoV‐2 on the CNS—including the underlying biology that may contribute to AD and other dementias. This consortium will link teams from around the world covering more than 22 million COVID‐19 cases to enroll two groups of individuals including people with disease, to be evaluated for follow‐up evaluations at 6, 9, and 18 months, and people who are already enrolled in existing international research studies to add additional measures and markers of their underlying biology.ConclusionsThe increasing evidence and understanding of SARS‐CoV‐2's impact on the CNS raises key questions on the impact for risk of later life cognitive decline, AD, and other dementia. This program of studies aims to better understand the long‐term consequences that may impact the brain, cognition, and functioning—including the underlying biology that may contribute to AD and other dementias

Sertraline for anxiety in adults with a diagnosis of autism (STRATA) : study protocol for a pragmatic, multicentre, double-blind, placebo-controlled randomised controlled trial

Background: Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) are commonly prescribed to manage anxiety in adults with an autism diagnosis. However, their effectiveness and adverse effect profile in the autistic population are not well known. This trial aims to determine the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the SSRI sertraline in reducing symptoms of anxiety and improving quality of life in adults with a diagnosis of autism compared with placebo and to quantify any adverse effects. Methods: STRATA is a two-parallel group, multi-centre, pragmatic, double-blind, randomised placebo-controlled trial with allocation at the level of the individual. It will be delivered through recruiting sites with autism services in 4 regional centres in the United Kingdom (UK) and 1 in Australia. Adults with an autism diagnosis and a Generalised Anxiety Disorder Assessment (GAD-7) score ≥ 10 at screening will be randomised 1:1 to either 25 mg sertraline or placebo, with subsequent flexible dose titration up to 200 mg. The primary outcome is GAD-7 scores at 16 weeks post-randomisation. Secondary outcomes include adverse effects, proportionate change in GAD-7 scores including 50% reduction, social anxiety, obsessive-compulsive symptoms, panic attacks, repetitive behaviours, meltdowns, depressive symptoms, composite depression and anxiety, functioning and disability and quality of life. Carer burden will be assessed in a linked carer sub-study. Outcome data will be collected using online/paper methods via video call, face-to-face or telephone according to participant preference at 16, 24 and 52 weeks post-randomisation, with brief safety checks and data collection at 1–2, 4, 8, 12 and 36 weeks. An economic evaluation to study the cost-effectiveness of sertraline vs placebo and a QuinteT Recruitment Intervention (QRI) to optimise recruitment and informed consent are embedded within the trial. Qualitative interviews at various times during the study will explore experiences of participating and taking the trial medication. Discussion: Results from this study should help autistic adults and their clinicians make evidence-based decisions on the use of sertraline for managing anxiety in this population. Trial registration: ISRCTN, ISRCTN15984604. Registered on 08 February 2021. EudraCT 2019-004312-66. ANZCTR ACTRN12621000801819. Registered on 07 April 2021

Measuring performance on the Healthcare Access and Quality Index for 195 countries and territories and selected subnational locations: a systematic analysis from the Global Burden of Disease Study 2016

Background A key component of achieving universal health coverage is ensuring that all populations have access to quality health care. Examining where gains have occurred or progress has faltered across and within countries is crucial to guiding decisions and strategies for future improvement. We used the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study 2016 (GBD 2016) to assess personal health-care access and quality with the Healthcare Access and Quality (HAQ) Index for 195 countries and territories, as well as subnational locations in seven countries, from 1990 to 2016.Methods Drawing from established methods and updated estimates from GBD 2016, we used 32 causes from which death should not occur in the presence of effective care to approximate personal health-care access and quality by location and over time. To better isolate potential effects of personal health-care access and quality from underlying risk factor patterns, we risk-standardised cause-specific deaths due to non-cancers by location-year, replacing the local joint exposure of environmental and behavioural risks with the global level of exposure. Supported by the expansion of cancer registry data in GBD 2016, we used mortality-to-incidence ratios for cancers instead of risk-standardised death rates to provide a stronger signal of the effects of personal health care and access on cancer survival. We transformed each cause to a scale of 0–100, with 0 as the first percentile (worst) observed between 1990 and 2016, and 100 as the 99th percentile (best); we set these thresholds at the country level, and then applied them to subnational locations. We applied a principal components analysis to construct the HAQ Index using all scaled cause values, providing an overall score of 0–100 of personal health-care access and quality by location over time. We then compared HAQ Index levels and trends by quintiles on the Socio-demographic Index (SDI), a summary measure of overall development. As derived from the broader GBD study and other data sources, we examined relationships between national HAQ Index scores and potential correlates of performance, such as total health spending per capita.Background A key component of achieving universal health coverage is ensuring that all populations have access to quality health care. Examining where gains have occurred or progress has faltered across and within countries is crucial to guiding decisions and strategies for future improvement. We used the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study 2016 (GBD 2016) to assess personal health-care access and quality with the Healthcare Access and Quality (HAQ) Index for 195 countries and territories, as well as subnational locations in seven countries, from 1990 to 2016.Methods Drawing from established methods and updated estimates from GBD 2016, we used 32 causes from which death should not occur in the presence of effective care to approximate personal health-care access and quality by location and over time. To better isolate potential effects of personal health-care access and quality from underlying risk factor patterns, we risk-standardised cause-specific deaths due to non-cancers by location-year, replacing the local joint exposure of environmental and behavioural risks with the global level of exposure. Supported by the expansion of cancer registry data in GBD 2016, we used mortality-to-incidence ratios for cancers instead of risk-standardised death rates to provide a stronger signal of the effects of personal health care and access on cancer survival. We transformed each cause to a scale of 0–100, with 0 as the first percentile (worst) observed between 1990 and 2016, and 100 as the 99th percentile (best); we set these thresholds at the country level, and then applied them to subnational locations. We applied a principal components analysis to construct the HAQ Index using all scaled cause values, providing an overall score of 0–100 of personal health-care access and quality by location over time. We then compared HAQ Index levels and trends by quintiles on the Socio-demographic Index (SDI), a summary measure of overall development. As derived from the broader GBD study and other data sources, we examined relationships between national HAQ Index scores and potential correlates of performance, such as total health spending per capita

Global, regional, and national comparative risk assessment of 79 behavioural, environmental and occupational, and metabolic risks or clusters of risks, 1990–2015: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2015

Background The Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study 2015 provides an up-to-date synthesis of the evidence for risk factor exposure and the attributable burden of disease. By providing national and subnational assessments spanning the past 25 years, this study can inform debates on the importance of addressing risks in context. Methods We used the comparative risk assessment framework developed for previous iterations of the Global Burden of Disease Study to estimate attributable deaths, disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs), and trends in exposure by age group, sex, year, and geography for 79 behavioural, environmental and occupational, and metabolic risks or clusters of risks from 1990 to 2015. This study included 388 risk-outcome pairs that met World Cancer Research Fund-defi ned criteria for convincing or probable evidence. We extracted relative risk and exposure estimates from randomised controlled trials, cohorts, pooled cohorts, household surveys, census data, satellite data, and other sources. We used statistical models to pool data, adjust for bias, and incorporate covariates. We developed a metric that allows comparisons of exposure across risk factors—the summary exposure value. Using the counterfactual scenario of theoretical minimum risk level, we estimated the portion of deaths and DALYs that could be attributed to a given risk. We decomposed trends in attributable burden into contributions from population growth, population age structure, risk exposure, and risk-deleted cause-specifi c DALY rates. We characterised risk exposure in relation to a Socio-demographic Index (SDI).Background The Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study 2015 provides an up-to-date synthesis of the evidence for risk factor exposure and the attributable burden of disease. By providing national and subnational assessments spanning the past 25 years, this study can inform debates on the importance of addressing risks in context. Methods We used the comparative risk assessment framework developed for previous iterations of the Global Burden of Disease Study to estimate attributable deaths, disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs), and trends in exposure by age group, sex, year, and geography for 79 behavioural, environmental and occupational, and metabolic risks or clusters of risks from 1990 to 2015. This study included 388 risk-outcome pairs that met World Cancer Research Fund-defi ned criteria for convincing or probable evidence. We extracted relative risk and exposure estimates from randomised controlled trials, cohorts, pooled cohorts, household surveys, census data, satellite data, and other sources. We used statistical models to pool data, adjust for bias, and incorporate covariates. We developed a metric that allows comparisons of exposure across risk factors—the summary exposure value. Using the counterfactual scenario of theoretical minimum risk level, we estimated the portion of deaths and DALYs that could be attributed to a given risk. We decomposed trends in attributable burden into contributions from population growth, population age structure, risk exposure, and risk-deleted cause-specifi c DALY rates. We characterised risk exposure in relation to a Socio-demographic Index (SDI)