Search

Zero-sum beliefs reflect the perception that one party's gains are necessarily offset by another party's losses. Although zero-sum relationships are, from a strictly theoretical perspective, symmetrical, we find evidence for asymmetrical zero-sum beliefs: The belief that others gain at one's own expense, but not vice versa. Across various contexts (international relations, interpersonal negotiations, political partisanship, organizational hierarchies) and research designs (within- and between-participant), we find that people are more prone to believe that others' success comes at their own expense than they are to believe that their own success comes at others' expense. Moreover, we find that people exhibit asymmetric zero-sum beliefs only when thinking about how their own party relates to other parties but not when thinking about how other parties relate to each other. Finally, we find that this effect is moderated by how threatened people feel by others' success and that reassuring people about their party's strengths eliminates asymmetric zero-sum beliefs. We discuss the theoretical contributions of our findings to research on interpersonal and intergroup zero-sum beliefs and their implications for understanding when and why people view life as zero-sum. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents the highlights of the 13th virtual Rural and Remote Mental Health Symposium (RRMHS) in Australia in November 2021. Topics include the effects of COVID-19 on rural mental health service reform and the benefits of physical health, vaccination and social well-being as components of a holistic approach to mental health and well-being. Presenters include Doctors Ruth Vine and Leanne Beagley and nurse Jo Rasmussen.

The article presents the discussion on rural health in Australia. Topics include rural health being prominent in most state and national health plans and workforce strategies; and widely dispersed rural health workforce in pharmacy, allied health, and general practitioner small businesses supported by the Medical Benefits Schedule (MBS).

Objective: To investigate the impact of COVID‐19 on the mental health and well‐being of rural paramedics, police, community nursing and child protection staff. Method: An online survey was distributed to investigate the sources of stress and support across individual, task and organisational domains. Setting and Participants: The survey was completed by 1542 paramedics, police, community nurses and child protection workers from all states and territories of Australia. This study describes the data for the 632 rural participants. Main outcome measures: The main measures of well‐being were the Public Health Questionnaire (PHQ9), the Generalised Anxiety Disorder (GAD7), the Maslach Burnout Inventory (MBI), workplace engagement, intention to quit and COVID‐19–related stress. Results: The mean depression and anxiety scores were 8.2 (PHQ9) and 6.8 (GAD7). This is 2–3 times that found in the general community. Over half (56.1%) of respondents showed high emotional exhaustion (burnout). The emotional exhaustion, depersonalisation and personal accomplishment mean scores were 28.5, 9.3 and 34.2, respectively. The strongest associations with burnout and psychological distress were workload, provision of practical support, training and organisational communication. A significant proportion of respondents were seriously considering quitting (27.4%) or looking for a new job with a different employer (28.5%) in the next 12 months. Conclusions: COVID‐19 has increased the workload and stress on rural front‐line community staff. The major sources of stress were related to organisations' responses to COVID‐19 and not COVID‐19 per se. The data suggest the most effective mental health interventions are practical and preventive, such as firstly ensuring fair and reasonable workloads. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Urgent action is required to combat rabies in both humans and animals in Myanmar as it is now more common than malaria [[6]]; the WHO target of achieving zero human deaths secondary to dog-mediated rabies in Myanmar is certainly in jeopardy [[7]]. Community engagement and empowerment Democracy signifies "the rule of the people"; the coup d'état has removed the voice of the people of Myanmar and is the strongest form of disempowerment. Strengthening health systems The Myanmar healthcare system has been systematically undermined by the previous military leadership, which leaves it at risk of "profound health system collapse" [[13]]. [Extracted from the article]

Introduction: People living with mental illness have poorer physical health and die on average 20 years younger than the general population. Most of this poor health and early death is due to preventable chronic health conditions. Using a collective impact model, Equally Well, provides examples of, how with the support of a backbone organisation, leadership is distributed to enable the development of new collaborative initiatives that are 'fit-for-purpose' and not imposed by a central agency. This presentation provides examples from Australia, New Zealand and UK on how the collective impact approach has been adapted and implemented. Aims, Objectives, Theory or Methods: The aim of Equally Well is to facilitate increased coordination and integration between a diverse range of partner organisations toward a common goal. Based on the theory and methods of the collective impact model, Equally Well looks to enhance the way organisations work together towards the ultimate objective of improving the physical health and reducing the life expectancy gap for people living with mental illness. A variety of methods were used, such as a national audit to identify and share best practice; and continuous communication to increase awareness of the issue, initiatives and opportunities to address this problem. Highlights or Results or Key Findings: A comprehensive national environmental scan and audit revealed 387 projects and initiatives underway to implement the recommendations of the Equally Well National Consensus Statement. The most effective and sustainable initiatives were then identified and highlighted through webinars, symposia, and social media. This served as a catalyst for partners to network, collaborate and share learnings and resources. In addition, policy, implementation and clinical delivery communities of practice were established as a forum to discuss these projects and their associated processes and challenges. As a result, new crossjurisdictional and inter-sectorial partnerships were established across the government, nongovernment, and research sectors. This distributed leadership and light-touch governance model means that contextually appropriate new partnerships can form according the context and capability of each organisation at the time. This presentation will outline case examples illustrating how this process facilitated collaborative partnerships to provide integrated holistic care. Conclusions: Supported by a strong policy framework, this experience demonstrated the capability of agencies to self-organise to form strong integrative partnerships. Further, this light-touch approach, means partnerships can develop to best suit their unique situational context, and combined with a shared, agreed goal, this results in better and sustainable 'fit-for-purpose' solutions. Implications for applicability/transferability, sustainability, and limitations: The processes and methods of a collective impact approach can be applied to a range of care scenarios to facilitate enhanced integration and collaboration. Working through local place-based leaders results in a more sustainable approach that works to focus, mobilize and coordinate existing capacity towards a common agenda. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents the discussion on Peter Brown, a Commonwealth public servant organising major Australian cultural events such as ballet, orchestral performances, and film showings in China and analysing cultural and social developments in the country.

Aim: We aim to promote discussion about an Indigenous Cultural Identity of Research Authors Standard (ICIRAS) for academic journal publications. Context: This is based on a gap in research publishing practice where Indigenous peoples' identity is not systematically and rigorously flagged in rural health research publications. There are widespread reforms, in different research areas, to counter the reputation of scientific research as a vehicle of racism and discrimination against the world's Indigenous peoples. Reflecting on these broader movements, the editorial teams of three rural health journals—the Australian Journal of Rural Health, the Canadian Journal of Rural Medicine, and Rural and Remote Health—recognised that Indigenous peoples' identity could be embedded in authorship details. Approach: An environmental scan (through a cultural safety lens where Indigenous cultural authority is respected, valued, and empowered) of literature was undertaken to detect the signs of inclusion of Indigenous peoples in research. This revealed many ways in which editorial boards of Journals could systematically improve their process so that there is 'nothing about Indigenous people, without Indigenous people' in rural health research publications. Conclusion: Improving the health and wellbeing of Indigenous peoples worldwide requires high quality research evidence. The philosophy of cultural safety supports the purposeful positioning of Indigenous peoples within the kaleidoscope of cultural knowledges as identified contributors and authors of research evidence. The ICIRAS is a call‐to‐action for research journals and institutions to rigorously improve publication governance that signals "Editing with IndigenUs and for IndigenUs". [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In the article, the editors discuss the changes implemented by the journal and its sister publications as of July 2022, including the new editorial rules to include Indigenous peoples as authors and the proposed creation of the Indigenous Cultural Identity of Research Authors Standard (ICIRAS).

The authors reflect on the position statement of the rural health journals "Canadian Journal of Rural Medicine" (CJRM), "Australian Journal of Rural Health" (AJRH), and "Rural and Remote Health" (RRH) on research and reconciliation with Indigenous peoples in academic journal publishing. Topics include the right of Indigenous Nations to determine, define and name their cultural identity, and the need to end research colonialism.

The authors present a position statement regarding the publication of articles about Indigenous people or communities in rural health journals, particularly "Australian Journal of Rural Health," "Canadian Journal of Rural Health" and "Rural and Remote Health." The move is aimed at showing respect to Indigenous cultural identity and to enhance all aspects of academic publishing. Also cited is the effort to promote and support Indigenous authors and rural research.