Assessment of causal link between psychological factors and symptom exacerbation in inflammatory bowel disease: a systematic review utilising Bradford Hill criteria and meta-analysis of prospective cohort studies

BACKGROUND: Psychological stress is a prevalent factor in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) with detrimental effects on patients' quality of life and possibly disease course. Although the aetiology of symptom exacerbation in IBD has been explored, determining any causation between psychological stress and symptom worsening remains challenging and requires a methodologically rigorous approach. AIM: The aim of this systematic review with meta-analysis was to determine a causal relationship between psychological stress and symptom exacerbation in IBD, subsequently utilising Bradford Hill's criteria (approach never used in this topic area before) to evaluate the likelihood of causal associations. METHODS: Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL and PsycInfo were searched for relevant studies up to July 20, 2019. Data extraction and quality appraisal were performed by two independent reviewers. Results of all retained papers were presented as a narrative synthesis. A random-effect meta-analysis was conducted on studies meeting the criteria for meta-analysis. Bradford Hill criteria were applied to assess the causality of the relationship between all psychological factors and symptom exacerbation. RESULTS: The searches yielded 2472 potential articles. Nineteen clinical prospective cohort studies were eligible for the narrative review with five suitable for the meta-analysis. Meta-analysis showed depression, anxiety and perceived stress did not have a statistically significant association with an increased risk of symptom exacerbation. Four of the Bradford Hill criteria were met which indicates that there is weak to moderate evidence of a causal association between all the psychological factors and disease activity. Inconsistent results and a dearth of studies using the same tools for measuring psychological factors suggest the need for more research to be done to facilitate more conclusive findings. CONCLUSIONS: This original review utilising Bradford Hill criteria in addition to meta-analysis to evaluate the causality of relationship between psychological factors and symptom exacerbation in IBD provides evidence that psychological factors have a weak to moderate causal involvement in IBD symptom exacerbation. However, when combining this finding with the outcomes of the meta-analysis, we can say that the results were inconclusive. Interventions to reduce the associated psychological impact should be part of the treatment plan for patients with IBD. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42012003143

The prevalence of cannabis use disorders in people who use medicinal cannabis : A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background The prevalence of cannabis use disorders (CUDs) in people who use cannabis recreationally has been estimated at 22%, yet there is a dearth of literature exploring CUDs among people who use medicinal cannabis. We aimed to systematically review the prevalence of CUDs in people who use medicinal cannabis. Methods In our systematic review and meta-analysis, we followed PRISMA guidelines and searched three databases (PsychInfo, Embase and PubMed) to identify studies examining the prevalence of CUDs in people who use medicinal cannabis. Meta-analyses were calculated on the prevalence of CUDs. Prevalence estimates were pooled across different prevalence periods using the DSM-IV and DSM-5. Results We conducted a systematic review of 14 eligible publications, assessing the prevalence of CUDs, providing data for 3681 participants from five different countries. The systematic review demonstrated that demographic factors, mental health disorders and the management of chronic pain with medicinal cannabis were associated with an elevated risk of CUDs. Meta-analyses were conducted on the prevalence of CUDs. For individuals using medicinal cannabis in the past 6–12 months, the prevalence of CUDs was 29% (95% CI: 21-38%) as per DSM-5 criteria. Similar prevalence was observed using DSM-IV (24%, CI: 14–38%) for the same period. When including all prevalence periods and using the DSM-5, the prevalence of CUDs in people who use medicinal cannabis was estimated at 25% (CI: 18-33%). Conclusions The prevalence of CUDs in people who use medicinal cannabis is substantial and comparable to people who use cannabis for recreational reasons, emphasizing the need for ongoing research to monitor the prevalence of CUDs in people who use medicinal cannabis

Identifying the dominant personality profiles in medical students: Implications for their well-being and resilience

Purpos

Cross-National Study of Mental Health and Employment Status Nine Months Post Social Distancing Implementation Practices

This cross-national study examined the mental health between those individuals working and those not working nine months post initial COVID-19 social distancing implementation. Respondents (N = 3,474) were recruited through social media (e.g. Facebook, Twitter) and completed an online survey in October/November 2020. The respondents were from Norway, the UK, the USA and Australia. The mental health of those working and not working were analysed using t tests and socio-demographics were compared using one-way analysis of variance. Respondents who were working were significantly more likely to experience better mental health, were younger, report higher levels of education, and significantly less likely to worry about their own situation, health or financial situation than respondents who were not employed. Respondents who were retired reported better mental health than respondents who were not working for other reasons (laid off/dismissed, receiving benefits, studying, other). These findings raise the importance for social workers and other health service providers to monitor the overall mental health of individuals especially when social distancing protocols are in place and as countries begin to recover from the pandemic.publishedVersio

Willingness to take the COVID-19 vaccine as reported nine months after the pandemic outbreak: A cross-national study

Although vaccination has been identified as an effective measure of reducing the spread of COVID-19, hesitancy to obtain a vaccine for COVID-19 has been shared. The aim of this cross-national study was to examine (i) the willingness in the general population to take the COVID-19 vaccine nine months after the pandemic outbreak and (ii) the willingness to take the vaccine in relation to sociodemographic variables, whether one has experienced COVID-19 infection, concerns about health and family, and trust in the authorities’ information about the pandemic. A cross-sectional survey design was used to collect data online in Norway, the UK, the USA, and Australia. Chi-Square tests or Fisher’s Exact test were used to analyze the data. Logistic regression analysis was used to assess direct associations between the independent variables and the outcome. Within the total sample (n = 3474), living in a city, having a college education, being concerned about your own health and the health of next of kin, and trusting information provided by authorities increased the likelihood of reporting willingness to take the COVID-19 vaccine. Across all countries, participants who reported trust in the authorities’ information about COVID-19 demonstrated a significantly higher plausibility of taking the COVID-19 vaccine.publishedVersio

Loneliness and its association with social media use during the COVID-19 outbreak

Social distancing rules during the COVID-19 pandemic changed social interaction for many and increased the risk of loneliness in the general population. Social media use has been ambiguously related to loneliness, and associations may differ by age. The study aimed to examine loneliness and its association with social media use within different age groups during the COVID-19 pandemic. A cross-sectional online survey was conducted in Norway, the United Kingdom, the United States, and Australia during April/May 2020, and 3,810 participants aged 18 years or above were recruited. Multiple regression analyses were conducted to examine associations between social media use and social and emotional loneliness within separate age groups. Emotional loneliness was higher among young adults and among those who used social media several times daily. Adjusting by sociodemographic variables, using more types of social media was associated with lower social loneliness among the oldest participants, and with higher emotional loneliness among the youngest participants. Among middle-aged participants, using social media more frequently was associated with lower social loneliness. We found that the associations between social media use and loneliness varied by age. Older people’s engagement on social media may be a resource to reduce loneliness during the COVID-19 pandemic. We observed higher levels of loneliness among high-frequent social media users of younger age.publishedVersio

Cross-national study of worrying, loneliness, and mental health during the COVID-19 pandemic: a comparison between individuals with and without infection in the family.

Objective: The objective of this study was to examine differences in worry, loneliness, and mental health between those individuals infected by COVID-19 or having someone their family infected, and the rest of the population. Methods: A cross-sectional online survey was conducted in Norway, UK, USA, and Australia during April/May 2020. Participants (n = 3810) were recruited via social media postings by the researchers and the involved universities. Differences between those with and without infection in the family were investigated with chi-square tests and independent t-tests. Multiple regression analyses were used to assess associations between sociodemographic variables and psychological outcomes (worry, loneliness, and mental health) in both groups. Results: Compared to their counterparts, participants with infection in the family reported higher levels of worries about themselves (p < 0.05) and their family members (p < 0.001) and had poorer mental health (p < 0.05). However, the effect sizes related to the differences were small. The largest effect (d = 0.24) concerned worries about their immediate family. Poorer psychological outcomes were observed in those who were younger, female, unemployed, living alone and had lower levels of education, yet with small effect sizes. Conclusions: In view of the small differences between those with and without infection, we generally conclude that the mental health effects of the COVID-19 situation are not limited to those who have been infected or have had an infection within the family but extend to the wider population

Loneliness and its associated factors nine months after the COVID-19 outbreak: a cross-national study

COVID-19 has been a global healthcare concern impacting multiple aspects of individual and community wellness. As one moves forward with different methods to reduce the infection and mortality rates, it is critical to continue to study the impact that national and local “social distancing” policies have on the daily lives of individuals. The aim of this study was to examine loneliness in relation to risk assessment, measures taken against risks, concerns, and social media use, while adjusting for sociodemographic variables. The cross-sectional study collected data from 3474 individuals from the USA, the UK, Norway, and Australia. Loneliness was measured with the de Jong Gierveld Loneliness Scale. Multiple linear regression was used in the analysis of associations between variables. The results showed that concerns about finances were more strongly associated with social loneliness, while concerns about the future was more strongly associated with emotional loneliness. Longer daily time spent on social media was associated with higher emotional loneliness. In conclusion, pandemic-related concerns seem to affect perceptions of loneliness. While social media can be used productively to maintain relationships, and thereby prevent loneliness, excessive use may be counterproductive.publishedVersio