Search

Objective: This study aimed to examine the prospective association between psychological well-being and overweight and obesity reversal., Methods: We analyzed data of UK children with overweight or obesity at ages 11 (n = 4556, baseline), 14 (n = 3791, baseline), and 17 years (follow-up). Psychological well-being-related measures were characterized into indexes of caregiver-reported child mental health and child-reported psychosocial well-being, with a higher score indicating better mental health or psychosocial well-being. Weight changes were presented as reversal versus persistence of overweight or obesity and residualized-change BMI z scores. Data were analyzed using regression analysis., Results: Better child mental health and psychosocial well-being at age 11 years were independently associated with increased odds of reversal versus persistence (odds ratio [OR] = 1.16, 95% CI: 1.03 to 1.29; OR = 1.29, 95% CI: 1.15 to 1.44, respectively) and decreased BMI z scores (β = -0.08, 95% CI: -0.13 to -0.03; β = -0.07, 95% CI: -0.11 to -0.03, respectively) at age 17 years. However, neither of the indexes was associated with weight changes when measured at age 14 years. Analyses between psychological well-being-related measures and timing of measures indicated that psychological well-being-related measures were more likely to prospectively predict weight changes when measured at age 11 versus age 14 years., Conclusions: Better psychological well-being at age 11 years is a prognostic factor that may be associated with an increased likelihood of reversing childhood overweight and obesity by age 17 years., (© 2024 The Author(s). Obesity published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of The Obesity Society.)

Experiencing discrimination is associated with poorer mental health and the demographic patterning of discrimination may explain social inequalities in mental health. The present research examined prevalence of perceived discrimination in the UK and associations with social inequalities in mental health. Data were taken from the UK Household Longitudinal Study (n = 32,003). Population subgroups (sex, age, ethnicity, health, religiousness, income, education, and occupation), perceived personal discrimination (personal experience) and perceived belonging to a discriminated group (identified as belonging to a group discriminated against in this country), and probable mental health problems (GHQ-12 assessed, cut off 4+) were reported on in 2019/2020. Nineteen percent of participants perceived personal discrimination in the last year, 9% perceived belonging to a discriminated group, and 22% had probable mental health problems. There were significant inequalities in both perceived discrimination and mental health. Being a younger adult, of mixed ethnicity, having health problems, having a university degree, and being unemployed increased risk of mental health problems and these associations were partially explained by perceived discrimination being more common among these groups. Perceived discrimination is common among UK adults, but prevalence differs by population subgroup. Perceived discrimination may contribute to social inequalities in mental health., Competing Interests: Declarations of Competing Interest None., (Copyright © 2023. Published by Elsevier B.V.)

Background: The share of workers who work part-time because full-time jobs are not available remains larger compared to the period prior to the 2008 crisis. For part-time workers, being available to work more hours than offered may have negative mental health implications., Method: Drawing on two nationally representative British surveys, we tested whether working less than 30 hours per week while preferring to work longer hours (underemployment) is associated with increased psychological distress. Distress was assessed using responses to the 12-item General Health Questionnaire in both samples., Results: In the National Child Development Study (N = 6,295), propensity score estimates indicated that the hours-underemployed workers experienced higher levels of psychological distress (β = 0.25, p <0.001) than full-time workers matched on observable characteristics, including prior distress levels. Fixed effects estimates using 18 years of the British Household Panel Survey (N = 8,665) showed that transitioning from full-time employment to underemployment predicted an increase in distress levels (β = 0.19, p <0.01). Conversely, transitioning from underemployment to full-time employment forecasted a reduction in distress (β = -0.18, p <0.001). On average, job earnings and perceptions of job security explained a small (≈ 10%) portion of the potential psychological impact of hours-underemployment., Conclusions: These findings highlight the possibility that underemployment among part-time workers may have detrimental psychological consequences. Policy interventions geared towards improving career opportunities for part-time workers would potentially ameliorate losses in psychological well-being experienced by this group., (Copyright © 2019. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

Limited research has examined whether accumulation of discrimination over time is associated with worse mental health and whether such experiences are related to socioeconomic status (SES). A sample of UK adults with self-reported discrimination experiences (n = 3863) was taken from three waves of the UK Household Longitudinal Study (2015–2020). Multinomial logistic regression assessed associations between SES (income, education, occupation) and cumulative discrimination (number of timepoints discrimination was reported). Logistic regression models assessed prospective associations between cumulative discrimination and probable mental health problems (GHQ-12; 4+ threshold). Those with lower income were more likely to report discrimination at one timepoint (vs. none). No SES measures were associated with experiencing discrimination at multiple timepoints. Participants who reported one timepoint of discrimination (vs. no experiences) were significantly more likely to report probable mental health problems (OR = 1.47, p <.001, 95% CI 1.20–1.80). Moreover, compared to those experiencing one timepoint, participants reporting multiple timepoints of discrimination were significantly more likely to report probable mental health problems (OR = 1.46, p =.002, 95% CI 1.15–1.86), indicating a cumulative association between discrimination and mental health. There was limited evidence that SES moderated this cumulative association. Mental health measures were based on self-report questionnaires and not a clinical diagnosis. Amongst a sample of UK adults, perceiving discrimination at multiple timepoints increased the likelihood of experiencing probable mental health problems. There was limited evidence that this cumulative association differed by SES. National measures designed to reduce discrimination may benefit mental health. • Accumulation of discriminatory experiences over time were studied. • Odds of cumulative discrimination differ by some demographics, but not SES. • Cumulative discrimination is associated with worse mental health. • Limited evidence effect of cumulative discrimination on mental health differ by SES. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Low socioeconomic status (SES) confers access to material resources and social standing and is an established risk factor of both depressive symptoms and suicidality. Subjective social status (SSS) assesses how people perceive their position within the social hierarchy and has been proposed to impact mental health. This study examined the relationship between SES and depressive symptoms and suicidality and tested whether SSS mediated these associations. This study drew on publicly available survey data from the US National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent to Adult Health (Add Health). Participants were surveyed at baseline in 2008 (N = 4948; aged 28.8 years) and at followed up in 2016–2018 (N = 3509; aged 37.8 years). SES was gauged using personal and household income, assets, education, and job prestige. SSS was assessed using the MacArthur Scale. Depressive symptoms were assessed using four-items from the Centre for Epidemiological Studies Scale of Depression (CES D) and participants reported suicidal ideation and suicide attempts in the past year. Both low SES and SSS were associated with elevated levels of depressive symptoms, suicidal ideation, and suicide attempts in cross-sectional and prospective analyses. SSS explained 27 % of the association between SES and depressive symptoms, 51 % of the relationship between SES and suicidal ideation, and 37 % of the link between SES and suicide attempts on average. These findings contribute to understanding the long-term effects of SSS and suggest that perceptions of status may be a key mechanism through which low SES forecasts the development of depressive symptoms and suicidality. • Observational cohort study of US adults followed from baseline in 2008 to follow-up in 2016–2018. • Both socioeconomic status (SES) and subjective social status (SSS) predicted increased depressive symptoms and suicidality. • Associations were evident in cross-sectional and prospective models. • SSS accounted for 27 % of the link between SES and depressive symptoms and 44 % of the link between SES and suicidality. • Findings suggest perceptions of status may explain why low SES predicts the development of depression and suicidality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) has produced a considerable public health burden but the impact that contracting the disease has on mental health is unclear. In this observational population-based cohort study, we examined longitudinal changes in psychological distress associated with testing positive for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Methods: Participants (N = 8002; observations = 139 035) were drawn from 23 waves of the Understanding America Study, a nationally representative probability-based online panel of American adults followed-up every 2 weeks from 1 April 2020 to 15 February 2021. Psychological distress was assessed using the standardized total score on the Patient Health Questionnaire-4. Results: Over the course of the study, 576 participants reported testing positive for COVID-19. Using regression analysis including individual and time-fixed effects we found that psychological distress increased by 0.29 standard deviations (p < 0.001) during the 2-week period when participants first tested positive for COVID-19. Distress levels remained significantly elevated (d = 0.16, p < 0.01) for a further 2 weeks, before returning to baseline levels. Coronavirus symptom severity explained changes in distress attributable to COVID-19, whereby distress was more pronounced among those whose symptoms were more severe and were slower to subside. Conclusions: This study indicates that testing positive for COVID-19 is associated with an initial increase in psychological distress that diminishes quickly as symptoms subside. Although COVID-19 may not produce lasting psychological distress among the majority of the general population it remains possible that a minority may suffer longer-term mental health consequences. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has had a range of negative social and economic effects that may contribute to a rise in mental health problems. In this observational population-based study, we examined longitudinal changes in the prevalence of mental health problems from before to during the COVID-19 crisis and identified subgroups that are psychologically vulnerable during the pandemic. Methods: Participants (N = 14 393; observations = 48 486) were adults drawn from wave 9 (2017–2019) of the nationally representative United Kingdom Household Longitudinal Study (UKHLS) and followed-up across three waves of assessment in April, May, and June 2020. Mental health problems were assessed using the 12-item General Health Questionnaire (GHQ-12). Results: The population prevalence of mental health problems (GHQ-12 score ⩾3) increased by 13.5 percentage points from 24.3% in 2017–2019 to 37.8% in April 2020 and remained elevated in May (34.7%) and June (31.9%) 2020. All sociodemographic groups examined showed statistically significant increases in mental health problems in April 2020. The increase was largest among those aged 18–34 years (18.6 percentage points, 95% CI 14.3–22.9%), followed by females and high-income and education groups. Levels of mental health problems subsequently declined between April and June 2020 but remained significantly above pre-COVID-19 levels. Additional analyses showed that the rise in mental health problems observed throughout the COVID-19 pandemic was unlikely to be due to seasonality or year-to-year variation. Conclusions: This study suggests that a pronounced and prolonged deterioration in mental health occurred as the COVID-19 pandemic emerged in the UK between April and June 2020. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In late 2020 a second wave of COVID-19 infections occurred in many countries and resulted in a national lockdown in the UK including stay at home orders and school closures. This study aimed to compare the prevalence of psychological distress before and during the second COVID-19 wave in the UK.Methods: This study drew on data from 10,657 participants from the nationally representative probability-based UK Household Longitudinal Study (UKHLS). The 12-item General Health Questionnaire (GHQ-12) assessment measure was used to detect the proportion of UK adults experiencing clinically significant psychological distress. Changes in distress levels associated with the second pandemic wave were examined between September 2020 and January 2021 using logistic regression and linear fixed-effects regression models.Results: Longitudinal analyses showed that the prevalence of clinically significant distress rose by 5.8% (95% CI: 4.4-7.2) from 21.3% in September 2020 to 27.1% in January 2021, compared with a 2019 pre-pandemic estimate of 21% in this cohort. Fixed effects analyses confirmed that the second COVID-19 wave was associated with a significant within-person increase in distress (d = 0.15, p < .001). Increases were particularly pronounced among those with school-age children in the home.Limitations: A non-specific measure of mental health symptoms was utilized and it was not possible to separate the potential impact of the pandemic from other changes occurring in tandem within the study period.Conclusion: Clinically significant distress rose during the second wave of the COVID-19 pandemic and reached levels similar to those observed in the immediate aftermath of the first pandemic wave. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

COVID-19 created a transformational shift in the working environment for much of the labour force, yet its impact on workers is unclear. This study uses longitudinal data to examine the wellbeing of 621 full-time workers assessed before (November 2019–February 2020) and during (May–June 2020) the first lockdown in the United Kingdom. We employ fixed effects analyses to investigate the impact of the restrictions and mandatory homeworking on cognitive, emotional, and psychological wellbeing. Within the sample, the rate of full-time homeworking increased from 2 to 74% between waves. We identify significant changes in 9 of the 15 measures assessed, with a general pattern of improvements in wellbeing during lockdown. Overall levels of stress, self-rated mental health, positive emotions and life and job satisfaction are not adversely affected by the restrictions. There is a reduction in the burnout symptoms of disengagement (−0.13 sd) and exhaustion (−0.20 sd) and in the frequency with which negative emotions are experienced at work (−0.15 sd). Workers feel more autonomous (+0.09 sd), closer to their co-workers (+0.10 sd), and more attached to their organisations (+0.19 sd). However, homelife satisfaction declines (−0.11 sd). These findings highlight the possibility that the COVID-19 pandemic and large-scale transition to homeworking was associated with unchanged or improved worker wellbeing. This study has important implications for governments and employers regarding a global shift to homeworking. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) on the mental health of the US population is unclear. This study drew on two nationally representative samples to compare the prevalence rate of anxiety in the U.S. before and during the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic.Methods: The Generalized Anxiety Disorder-2 (GAD-2) screening tool was used to detect the proportion of US adults screening positive for high levels of anxiety symptoms. Anxiety symptoms was assessed in 2019 using the National Health Interview Survey (NHIS; N = 30,915) and during the pandemic using biweekly surveys collected as part of the Understanding America Study (UAS; N=8,022 Obs.=121,768) between March and December 2020.Results: The proportion of participants with high levels of anxiety symptoms increased significantly from 8.1% (95% CI[7.7, 8.5]) in 2019 to 21.4% (95% CI[19.9, 22.9]) at the beginning of April, 2020. The prevalence then declined to 11.4% (95% CI[10.3, 12.5]) in May and remained 3% above 2019 levels until December 2020. This pattern of increasing anxiety between 2019 and April 2020 followed by a rapid decrease in anxiety was identified across all demographic characteristics examined.Limitations: The NHIS and UAS samples differ in their sampling and mode of administration which may bias comparisons between samples.Conclusions: Anxiety symptoms increased markedly during the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic and reduced quickly as stay-at-home orders were lifted. These findings highlight the importance of providing mental health supports during future lockdowns and suggest that resilience in mental health may have been a key population-level response to the demands of the pandemic. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: It has been shown that psychological distress rose rapidly as the COVID‐19 pandemic emerged and then recovered to pre‐crisis levels as social lockdown restrictions were eased in the United States. The aim of the current study was to investigate psychosocial and behavioural factors that may explain the rise and fall of distress during the initial months of the COVID‐19 crisis. Design: This study examined six waves of longitudinal nationally representative data from the Understanding America Study (UAS) collected between March and June 2020 (N = 7,138, observations = 34,125). Methods: Mediation analysis was used to identify whether changes in distress (PHQ‐4) during the COVID‐19 pandemic were explained by the following factors: perceived infection risk and risk of death, perceived financial risks, lifestyle changes resulting from the virus, perceived discrimination related to the virus, and changes in substance use and employment status. Results: All mediating factors played a role in explaining changes in distress and together accounted for 70% of the increase in distress between 10‐18 March and 1‐14 April and 46.4% of the decline in distress between 1‐14 April and early June 2020. Changes in perceived health risks were most important in explaining changes in distress followed by changes in lifestyle and the perceived financial risks associated with COVID‐19. Conclusions: This study provides longitudinal population‐based evidence detailing the mediating factors explaining changes in distress during the COVID‐19 crisis. Perceived health risks associated with the virus may play a key role in explaining rising and falling levels of psychological distress during the COVID‐19 pandemic. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There is growing concern that the COVID-19 crisis may have long-standing mental health effects across society particularly amongst those with pre-existing mental health conditions. In this observational population-based study, we examined how psychological distress changed following the emergence of the COVID-19 crisis in the United States and tested whether certain population subgroups were vulnerable to persistent distress during the crisis. We analyzed longitudinal nationally representative data from eight waves of the Understanding America Study (UAS) collected between March 10th and July 20th, 2020 (N = 7319 Observations = 46,145). Differences in distress trends were examined by age, sex, race/ethnicity, and household income and by the presence of a pre-existing mental health diagnosis. Psychological distress was assessed using the standardized total score on the Patient Health Questionnaire-4 (PHQ-4). On average psychological distress increased significantly by 0.27 standard deviations (95% CI [0.23,0.31], p <.001) from March 10–18 to April 1–14, 2020 as the COVID-19 crisis emerged and lockdown restrictions began in the US. Distress levels subsequently declined to mid-March levels by June 2020 (d = –0.31, 95% CI [–0.34, –0.27], p <.001). Across the sociodemographic groups examined and those with pre-existing mental health conditions we observed a sharp rise in distress followed by a recovery to baseline distress levels. This study identified substantial increases in distress in the US during the emergence of the COVID-19 crisis that largely diminished in the weeks that followed and suggests that population level resilience in mental health may be occurring in response to the pandemic. • The global spread of COVID-19 may have had an enduring impact on mental health. • Longitudinal nationally representative studies addressing this topic are scarce. • This study examines mental health beyond the initial stage of the COVID-19 crisis. • Identifies a substantial rise in distress in the U.S. from March to April 2020. • Psychological distress levels returned to baseline by June 2020. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and the associated social distancing and lockdown restrictions are expected to have substantial and enduring mental health effects. In this study, we aimed to assess depression levels before and during the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States.Methods: We used the Patient Health Questionnaire-2 (PHQ-2) brief screening instrument to detect probable depression in two nationally representative surveys of US adults. Pre-pandemic levels of depression were assessed in a sample of 5,075 adults from the 2017-2018 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES). Depression was assessed in March (N = 6,819) and April 2020 (N = 5,428) in the Understanding America Study, a representative sample of the US population.Results: The percentage of US adults with depression increased significantly from 8.7% (95% CI[7.6%-9.8%]) in 2017-2018 to 10.6% (95% CI[9.6%-11.6%) in March 2020 and 14.4% (95% CI[13.1%-15.7%]) in April 2020. Statistically significant increases in depression levels were observed for all population subgroups examined with the exception of those aged 65+ years and Black participants. Young adults (aged 18-34) experienced a marked increase in depression of 13.4 percentage points (95% CI [9.5%-17.2%]) that was larger than any other age group. Additional analyses of depression trends in NHANES from 2007/2008-2017/2018 showed that the substantial increase in depression in April 2020 was unlikely to be due to typical year-to-year variation.Conclusions: Our findings suggest that depression levels have risen substantially during the COVID-19 pandemic and reinforce recent findings indicating that young adults may be particularly vulnerable to the mental health effects of the pandemic. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Summary: The obesity crisis is one of the largest public health challenges of the 21st century. Population‐level adiposity has increased dramatically in recent times, and people not recognizing that they have overweight or obesity is now common. It has been widely assumed that not recognizing oneself as having overweight is detrimental to weight management and long‐term health. Here, diverse research is reviewed that converges on the counterintuitive conclusion that not recognizing oneself as having overweight is actually associated with more favourable physical and mental health outcomes than recognizing oneself as having overweight. Drawing on existing models in social psychology and weight stigma research, an explanatory model of the health effects of self‐perception of overweight is outlined. This model proposes that self‐perception of overweight triggers social rejection concerns and the internalization of weight stigma, which in turn induce psychological distress and negatively impact health‐promoting lifestyle behaviours. How self‐perception of overweight may in part explain progression from overweight to obesity, and the public health implications of self‐perception of overweight and obesity are also discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Social disadvantage consistently predicts both self-reported distress and clinically diagnosed disorders such as depression. Yet, many individuals who are exposed to disadvantage do not report high levels of distress. This study extends our recent work showing that high cognitive ability may protect against the negative health consequences of exposure to disadvantaged backgrounds. We test whether this 'buffer effect' exists across clinically relevant indices of mental health in a population-representative sample. Methods: In total, 27 985 participants were drawn from the UK Household Longitudinal Study (Understanding Society). Clinical diagnoses of depression and clinically relevant measures of psychological distress [i.e. Short Form-12 (SF-12) Mental Component, General Health Questionnaire (GHQ)] and trait neuroticism were assessed. Cognitive ability was derived from performance on word recall, verbal fluency and numerical ability tasks. Early-life disadvantage was gauged using family background measures assessing parental education and occupation at age 14. Results: Background disadvantage predicted increased levels of reported psychological distress and neuroticism. These associations were moderated by cognitive ability. Across all available mental health measures, the negative association between early-life disadvantage and poor adult mental health was strongest at low (−1 s.d.) cognitive ability and was no longer evident at high (+1 s.d.) levels of cognitive ability. Conclusions: The results provide support for a cognitive buffering hypothesis linking high cognitive ability to a decrease in the magnitude of the social gradient in mental health. Those disadvantaged by both low socioeconomic status and low cognitive ability may benefit from targeted prevention and treatment programmes aiming to reduce socioeconomic disparities in mental health. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Rationale Symptoms of mental health problems have been shown to predict adverse labour market outcomes including unemployment, but no studies have used sibling models to examine the relationship between clinically diagnosed psychiatric conditions in adolescence and subsequent unemployment. Objective This study used extensive Swedish registry data to investigate the link between psychiatric conditions diagnosed during military conscription and unemployment over two decades. Further, we identified whether this relation was amplified during an economic downturn and tested whether it was affected by adjustment for unobserved family characteristics using sibling fixed-effects models. Method Psychiatric conditions were diagnosed by psychologists and psychiatrists at military conscription in sample of 929,191 Swedish men (mean age = 18.4 years) between 1969 and 1989. The average number of days unemployed per year was observed from 1992 to 2012, using the records of the Swedish Public Employment Services. Results After adjustment for physical health and childhood socioeconomic status those diagnosed with any psychiatric condition experienced approximately an additional 10 days per year unemployment compared to others. Alcohol (16 days unemployment) and other substance use disorders (17 days) were the strongest predictors of exposure to future unemployment, followed by personality disorders (10 days), neurotic and adjustment conditions (nine days), and depressive disorders (six days). Family background factors accounted for approximately half of the observed relationship between mental health conditions and unemployment. Psychiatric conditions interacted with macroeconomic conditions such that those with pre-existing alcohol-related, and neurotic and adjustment disorders were disproportionately more likely to become unemployed following the 1990s crisis in Sweden. Conclusions Adolescent mental health conditions forecast an elevated risk of unemployment, which endures over the life course and is amplified in times of economic uncertainty. Investment in youth mental health services and alcohol and substance use prevention programs may yield economic benefits by reducing unemployment. Highlights • Large sample observed over two decades with adjustment for sibling fixed-effects. • Diagnosed adolescent psychiatric disorders predicted high risk of adult unemployment. • Alcohol and substance use disorders were most closely linked to adult unemployment. • Link between psychiatric disorders and unemployment was amplified during a crisis. • Investment in adolescent mental health services may yield long-run economic benefits. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Rationale Several studies have shown a link between psychological distress in early life and subsequent higher unemployment, but none have used sibling models to account for the unobserved family background characteristics which may explain the relationship. Objective This paper uses the National Longitudinal Study of Youth 1997 data to examine whether adolescent psychological distress in 2000 predicts higher unemployment over 2000–11, whether this relationship changed in the period following the Great Recession, and whether it is robust to adjustment for family effects. Methods 7125 cohort members (2986 siblings) self-reported their mental health in 2000 and employment activities over 2000–11. This association was examined using Probit and ordinary least squares regressions controlling for intelligence, physical health, other sociodemographic characteristics and family background. Results After adjustment for covariates and compared to those with low distress, highly distressed adolescents were 2.7 percentage points (32%) more likely to be unemployed, 5.1 points (26%) more likely to be unemployed or out of the labor force and experienced 11 weeks (28%) more unemployment. The impact of high distress was similar to a one standard deviation decrease in intelligence, and double the magnitude of having a serious physical health problem, and these estimates were robust to adjustment for family fixed-effects. The highly distressed were also disproportionately more likely to become unemployed or exit the labor force in the years following the Great Recession. Conclusion These findings provide strong evidence of the unemployment penalty of early-life psychological distress and suggest that this relationship may be intensified during economic recessions. Investing in mental health in early life may be an effective way to reduce unemployment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• Examines a large national sample of over 260,000 college students over 8 consecutive years. • Eating disorder risk increased substantially by 13 percentage points from 2013 to 2020/2021. • Eating disorder risk increased by 3 percentage points during the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020/2021. • Findings call for an expansion of prevention and intervention efforts to reach vulnerable students. Despite concerns about rising rates of mental health problems among college students in recent years, little is known about trends in eating disorder (ED). This study examined data from the 2013–2020/2021 Healthy Minds Study (HMS), a large study of US college students (N = 267,599). Students completed the SCOFF scale, a validated measure of ED symptoms. From 2013 to 2020/2021 the prevalence of ED risk increased significantly from 15% to 28% (13% increase, 95% CI, 12.2–13.9) with young, female, and Hispanic students experiencing the largest increases. ED risk increased significantly by 3 percentage points (95% CI, 1.7–4.2) during the COVID-19 pandemic. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The effect of childhood mental health on later unemployment has not yet been established. In this article we assess whether childhood psychological distress places young people at high risk of subsequent unemployment and whether the presence of economic recession strengthens this relationship. This study was based on 19,217 individuals drawn from two nationally-representative British prospective cohort studies; the Longitudinal Study of Young People in England (LSYPE) and the National Child Development Study (NCDS). Both cohorts contain rich contemporaneous information detailing the participants' early life socioeconomic background, household characteristics, and physical health. In adjusted analyses in the LSYPE sample ( N = 10,232) those who reported high levels of distress at age 14 were 2 percentage points more likely than those with low distress to be unemployed between ages 16 and 21. In adjusted analyses of the NCDS sample ( N = 8985) children rated as having high distress levels by their teachers at age 7 and 11 were 3 percentage points more likely than those with low distress to be unemployed between ages 16 and 23. Our examination of the 1980 UK recession in the NCDS cohort found the difference in average unemployment level between those with high versus low distress rose from 2.6 pct points in the pre-recession period to 3.9 points in the post-recession period. These findings point to a previously neglected contribution of childhood mental health to youth unemployment, which may be particularly pronounced during times of economic recession. Our findings also suggest a further economic benefit to enhancing the provision of mental health services early in life. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• COVID-19 may have a profound and enduring influence on population mental health. • Few studies have tracked changes in mental health before and during the pandemic. • Distress levels declined quickly after an initial rise at the start of the pandemic. • Psychological distress levels returned to baseline (2019) levels by July 2020. • Recovery was observed across all demographic subgroups examined. In a large (n =10918), national, longitudinal probability-based sample of UK adults the prevalence of clinically significant psychological distress rose from prepandemic levels of 20.8% in 2019 to 29.5% in April 2020 and then declined significantly to prepandemic levels by September (20.8%). Longitudinal analyses showed that all demographic groups examined (age, sex, race/ethnicity, income) experienced increases in distress after the onset of the pandemic followed by significant decreases. By September 2020 distress levels were indistinguishable from prepandemic levels for all groups. This recovery may reflect the influence of the easing of restrictions and psychological adaptation to the demands of the pandemic. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A letter to the editor about the risk of developing psychosis is presented.

Background: Longitudinal data indicates that the mental health of the general population may not have been as badly affected by the COVID-19 pandemic as some had feared. Most studies examining change in mental health during the pandemic have assumed population homogeneity which may conceal evidence of worsening mental health for some. In this study, we applied a heterogeneous perspective to determine if there were distinct groups in the population characterised by different patterns of change in internalizing symptoms during the pandemic.Methods: Self-report data were collected from a nationally representative sample of Irish adults (N = 1041) at four time-points between April and December 2020.Results: In the entire sample, mean levels of internalizing symptoms significantly declined from March to December 2020. However, we identified four distinct groups with different patterns of change. The most common response was 'Resilience' (66.7%), followed by 'Improving' (17.9%), 'Worsening' (11.3%), and 'Sustained' (4.1%). Belonging to the 'Worsening' class was associated with younger age, city dwelling, current and past treatment for a mental health problem, higher levels of empathy, and higher levels of loneliness.Limitations: Sample attrition was relatively high and although this was managed using robust statistical methods, bias associated with non-responses cannot be entirely ruled out.Conclusion: The majority of adults experienced no change, or an improvement in internalizing symptoms during the pandemic, and a relatively small proportion of adults experienced a worsening of internalizing symptoms. Limited public mental health resources should be targeted toward helping these at-risk individuals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Increases in mental health problems have been observed during the COVID-19 pandemic. The objectives were to examine the extent to which mental health symptoms changed during the pandemic in 2020, whether changes were persistent or short lived, and if changes were symptom specific.Methods: Systematic review and meta-analysis of longitudinal cohort studies examining changes in mental health among the same group of participants before vs. during the pandemic in 2020.Results: Sixty-five studies were included. Compared to pre-pandemic outbreak, there was an overall increase in mental health symptoms observed during March-April 2020 (SMC = .102 [95% CI: .026 to .192]) that significantly declined over time and became non-significant (May-July SMC = .067 [95% CI: -.022 to .157]. Compared to measures of anxiety (SMC = 0.13, p = 0.02) and general mental health (SMC = -.03, p = 0.65), increases in depression and mood disorder symptoms tended to be larger and remained significantly elevated in May-July [0.20, 95% CI: .099 to .302]. In primary analyses increases were most pronounced among samples with physical health conditions and there was no evidence of any change in symptoms among samples with a pre-existing mental health condition.Limitations: There was a high degree of unexplained heterogeneity observed (I2s > 90%), indicating that change in mental health was highly variable across samples.Conclusions: There was a small increase in mental health symptoms soon after the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic that decreased and was comparable to pre-pandemic levels by mid-2020 among most population sub-groups and symptom types. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A letter to the editor is presented in response to the article "Income and the Middle Peak in Common Mental Disorder Prevalence," by I. A. Lang et al, published in a 2011 issue.

Obesity is associated with a significant disease burden, but whether recognising as opposed to failing to recognise personal overweight is beneficial or detrimental to mental health is unclear. Here we examine the associations between perceived overweight and depressive symptoms and suicidality. A systematic search of three electronic databases yielded 10,398 unique records, from which 32 studies (110 observations) were eligible for inclusion. Pooled odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated for each outcome using random effects meta-analyses and potential publication bias was examined. Perceived overweight was associated with an increased risk of depressive symptoms (OR: 1.42, CI: 1.31, 1.54 p <.0001, N >128,585) and suicidality (OR: 1.41, CI: 1.28, 1.56, p <.0001, N = 133,576) in both cross-sectional and longitudinal studies. The association between perceived overweight and poorer mental health was observed irrespective of study origin, participant age (children vs. adults), gender, and whether or not a person was objectively overweight. The pooled statistical relationship between objective weight status and poorer mental health was attenuated to non-significance when perceived overweight was accounted for, suggesting that the detrimental effect of overweight on mental health is largely dependent on whether or not a person identifies as overweight. • Perceived overweight was associated with increased depression and suicidality in this systematic review and meta-analysis • Weight perception also explained the relationship between BMI and mental health • Results were consistent across multiple subgroup and sensitivity analyses • However, heterogeneity and the inclusion of only observational data limit the strength of conclusions • Results highlight the importance of the psychological experience of overweight in mental health [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]