Anxiolytic effects of endocannabinoid enhancing compounds:A systematic review and meta-analysis

The endocannabinoid system is a promising candidate for anxiolytic therapy, but translation to the clinic has been lagging. We meta-analyzed the evidence for anxiety-reduction by compounds that facilitate endocannabinoid signaling in humans and animals. To identify areas of specific potential, effects of moderators were assessed. Literature was searched in Pubmed and Embase up to May 2021. A placebo/vehicle-control group was required and in human studies, randomization. We excluded studies that co-administered other substances. Risk of bias was assessed with SYRCLE's RoB tool and Cochrane RoB 2.0. We conducted three-level random effects meta-analyses and explored sources of heterogeneity using Bayesian regularized meta-regression (BRMA). The systematic review yielded 134 studies. We analyzed 120 studies (114 animal, 6 human) that investigated cannabidiol (CBD, 61), URB597 (39), PF-3845 (6) and AM404 (14). Pooled effects on conditioned and unconditioned anxiety in animals (with the exception of URB597 on unconditioned anxiety) and on experimentally induced anxiety in humans favored the investigational drugs over placebo/vehicle. Publication year was negatively associated with effects of CBD on unconditioned anxiety. Compared to approach avoidance tests, tests of repetitive-compulsive behavior were associated with larger effects of CBD and URB597, and the social interaction test with smaller effects of URB597. Larger effects of CBD on unconditioned anxiety were observed when anxiety pre-existed. Studies reported few side effects at therapeutic doses. The evidence quality was low with indications of publication bias. More clinical trials are needed to translate the overall positive results to clinical applications.</p

Anxiolytic effects of endocannabinoid enhancing compounds: A systematic review and meta-analysis

The endocannabinoid system is a promising candidate for anxiolytic therapy, but translation to the clinic has been lagging. We meta-analyzed the evidence for anxiety-reduction by compounds that facilitate endocannabinoid signaling in humans and animals. To identify areas of specific potential, effects of moderators were assessed. Literature was searched in Pubmed and Embase up to May 2021. A placebo/vehicle-control group was required and in human studies, randomization. We excluded studies that co-administered other substances. Risk of bias was assessed with SYRCLE's RoB tool and Cochrane RoB 2.0. We conducted three-level random effects meta-analyses and explored sources of heterogeneity using Bayesian regularized meta-regression (BRMA). The systematic review yielded 134 studies. We analyzed 120 studies (114 animal, 6 human) that investigated cannabidiol (CBD, 61), URB597 (39), PF-3845 (6) and AM404 (14). Pooled effects on conditioned and unconditioned anxiety in animals (with the exception of URB597 on unconditioned anxiety) and on experimentally induced anxiety in humans favored the investigational drugs over placebo/vehicle. Publication year was negatively associated with effects of CBD on unconditioned anxiety. Compared to approach avoidance tests, tests of repetitive-compulsive behavior were associated with larger effects of CBD and URB597, and the social interaction test with smaller effects of URB597. Larger effects of CBD on unconditioned anxiety were observed when anxiety pre-existed. Studies reported few side effects at therapeutic doses. The evidence quality was low with indications of publication bias. More clinical trials are needed to translate the overall positive results to clinical applications

Early Indicators of COVID-19 Infection Prevention Behaviors:Machine Learning Identifies Personal and Country-Level Factors

The Coronavirus is highly infectious and potentially deadly. In the absence of a cure or a vaccine, the infection prevention behaviors recommended by the World Health Organization constitute the only measure that is presently available to combat the pandemic. The unprecedented impact of this pandemic calls for swift identification of factors most important for predicting infection prevention behavior. In this paper, we used a machine learning approach to assess the relative importance of potential indicators of personal infection prevention behavior in a global psychological survey we conducted between March-May 2020 (N = 56,072 across 28 countries). The survey data were enriched with society-level variables relevant to the pandemic. Results indicated that the two most important indicators of self-reported infection prevention behavior were individual-level injunctive norms—beliefs that people in the community should engage in social distancing and self-isolation, followed by endorsement of restrictive containment measures (e.g., mandatory vaccination). Society-level factors (e.g., national healthcare infrastructure, confirmed infections) also emerged as important indicators. Social attitudes and norms were more important than personal factors considered most important by theories of health behavior. The model accounted for 52% of the variance in infection prevention behavior in a separate test sample—above the performance of psychological models of health behavior. These results suggest that individuals are intuitively aware that this pandemic constitutes a social dilemma situation, where their own infection risk is partly dependent on the behaviors of others. If everybody engaged in infection prevention behavior, the virus could be defeated even without a vaccine

Cooperation and Trust Across Societies During the COVID-19 Pandemic

Cross-societal differences in cooperation and trust among strangers in the provision of public goods may be key to understanding how societies are managing the COVID-19 pandemic. We report a survey conducted across 41 societies between March and May 2020 (N = 34,526), and test pre-registered hypotheses about how cross-societal differences in cooperation and trust relate to prosocial COVID-19 responses (e.g., social distancing), stringency of policies, and support for behavioral regulations (e.g., mandatory quarantine). We further tested whether cross-societal variation in institutions and ecologies theorized to impact cooperation were associated with prosocial COVID-19 responses, including institutional quality, religiosity, and historical prevalence of pathogens. We found substantial variation across societies in prosocial COVID-19 responses, stringency of policies, and support for behavioral regulations. However, we found no consistent evidence to support the idea that cross-societal variation in cooperation and trust among strangers is associated with these outcomes related to the COVID-19 pandemic. These results were replicated with another independent cross-cultural COVID-19 dataset (N = 112,136), and in both snowball and representative samples. We discuss implications of our results, including challenging the assumption that managing the COVID-19 pandemic across societies is best modeled as a public goods dilemma

Trust in government and its associations with health behaviour and prosocial behaviour during the COVID-19 pandemic

Previous studies suggested that public trust in government is vital for implementations of social policies that rely on public's behavioural responses. This study examined associations of trust in government regarding COVID-19 control with recommended health behaviours and prosocial behaviours. Data from an international survey with representative samples (N=23,733) of 23 countries were analysed. Specification curve analysis showed that higher trust in government was significantly associated with higher adoption of health and prosocial behaviours in all reasonable specifications of multilevel linear models (median standardised β=0.173 and 0.244, P<0.001). We further used structural equation modelling to explore potential determinants of trust in government regarding pandemic control. Governments perceived as well organised, disseminating clear messages and knowledge on COVID-19, and perceived fairness were positively associated with trust in government (standardised β=0.358, 0.230, 0.055, and 0.250, P<0.01). These results highlighted the importance of trust in government in the control of COVID-19

Pandemic Boredom: Little Evidence That Lockdown-Related Boredom Affects Risky Public Health Behaviors Across 116 Countries

Some public officials have expressed concern that policies mandating collective public health behaviors (e.g., national/regional "lockdown ") may result in behavioral fatigue that ultimately renders such policies ineffective. Boredom, specifically, has been singled out as one potential risk factor for noncompliance. We examined whether there was empirical evidence to support this concern during the COVID-19 pandemic in a large cross-national sample of 63,336 community respondents from 116 countries. Although boredom was higher in countries with more COVID-19 cases and in countries that instituted more stringent lockdowns, such boredom did not predict longitudinal within-person decreases in social distancing behavior (or vice versa; n = 8,031) in early spring and summer of 2020. Overall, we found little evidence that changes in boredom predict individual public health behaviors (handwashing, staying home, self-quarantining, and avoiding crowds) over time, or that such behaviors had any reliable longitudinal effects on boredom itself. In summary, contrary to concerns, we found little evidence that boredom posed a public health risk during lockdown and quarantine

A randomised controlled trial of supplemental oxygen versus medical air during exercise training in people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: Supplemental oxygen in pulmonary rehabilitation trial (SuppORT) (Protocol)

© 2016 Alison et al. Background: Oxygen desaturation during exercise is common in people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The aim of the study is to determine, in people with COPD who desaturate during exercise, whether supplemental oxygen during an eight-week exercise training program is more effective than medical air (sham intervention) in improving exercise capacity and health-related quality of life both at the completion of training and at six-month follow up. Methods/Design: This is a multi-centre randomised controlled trial with concealed allocation, blinding of participants, exercise trainers and assessors, and intention-to-treat analysis. 110 people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease who demonstrate oxygen desaturation lower than 90 % during the six-minute walk test will be recruited from pulmonary rehabilitation programs in seven teaching hospitals in Australia. People with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease on long term oxygen therapy will be excluded. After confirmation of eligibility and baseline assessment, participants will be randomised to receive either supplemental oxygen or medical air during an eight-week supervised treadmill and cycle exercise training program, three times per week for eight weeks, in hospital outpatient settings. Primary outcome measures will be endurance walking capacity assessed by the endurance shuttle walk test and health-related quality of life assessed by the Chronic Respiratory Disease Questionnaire. Secondary outcomes will include peak walking capacity measured by the incremental shuttle walk test, dyspnoea via the Dyspnoea-12 questionnaire and physical activity levels measured over seven days using an activity monitor. All outcomes will be measured at baseline, completion of training and at six-month follow up. Discussion: Exercise training is an essential component of pulmonary rehabilitation for people with COPD. This study will determine whether supplemental oxygen during exercise training is more effective than medical air in improving exercise capacity and health-related quality of life in people with COPD who desaturate during exercise. Trial registration: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12612000395831 , 5th Jan,201

Lives versus Livelihoods? Perceived economic risk has a stronger association with support for COVID-19 preventive measures than perceived health risk

This paper examines whether compliance with COVID-19 mitigation measures is motivated by wanting to save lives or save the economy (or both), and which implications this carries to fight the pandemic. National representative samples were collected from 24 countries (N = 25,435). The main predictors were (1) perceived risk to contract coronavirus, (2) perceived risk to suffer economic losses due to coronavirus, and (3) their interaction effect. Individual and country-level variables were added as covariates in multilevel regression models. We examined compliance with various preventive health behaviors and support for strict containment policies. Results show that perceived economic risk consistently predicted mitigation behavior and policy support—and its effects were positive. Perceived health risk had mixed effects. Only two significant interactions between health and economic risk were identified—both positive

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

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