Search

BackgroundSeveral studies have reported weak associations between religious or spiritual belief and psychological health. However, most have been cross-sectional surveys in the USA, limiting inference about generalizability. An international longitudinal study of incidence of major depression gave us the opportunity to investigate this relationship further.MethodData were collected in a prospective cohort study of adult general practice attendees across seven countries. Participants were followed at 6 and 12 months. Spiritual and religious beliefs were assessed using a standardized questionnaire, and DSM-IV diagnosis of major depression was made using the Composite International Diagnostic Interview (CIDI). Logistic regression was used to estimate incidence rates and odds ratios (ORs), after multiple imputation of missing data.ResultsThe analyses included 8318 attendees. Of participants reporting a spiritual understanding of life at baseline, 10.5% had an episode of depression in the following year compared to 10.3% of religious participants and 7.0% of the secular group (p < 0.001). However, the findings varied significantly across countries, with the difference being significant only in the UK, where spiritual participants were nearly three times more likely to experience an episode of depression than the secular group [OR 2.73, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.59–4.68]. The strength of belief also had an effect, with participants with strong belief having twice the risk of participants with weak belief. There was no evidence of religion acting as a buffer to prevent depression after a serious life event.ConclusionsThese results do not support the notion that religious and spiritual life views enhance psychological well-being. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Background: Corona Virus Disease 19 (COVID-19) is a new pandemic, declared a public health emergency by the World Health Organization, which could have negative consequences for pregnant and postpartum women. The scarce evidence published to date suggests that perinatal mental health has deteriorated since the COVID-19 outbreak. However, the few studies published so far have some limitations, such as a cross-sectional design and the omission of important factors for the understanding of perinatal mental health, including governmental restriction measures and healthcare practices implemented at the maternity hospitals. Within the Riseup-PPD COST Action, a study is underway to assess the impact of COVID-19 in perinatal mental health. The primary objectives are to (1) evaluate changes in perinatal mental health outcomes; and (2) determine the risk and protective factors for perinatal mental health during the COVID-19 pandemic. Additionally, we will compare the results between the countries participating in the study., Methods: This is an international prospective cohort study, with a baseline and three follow-up assessments over a six-month period. It is being carried out in 11 European countries (Albania, Bulgaria, Cyprus, France, Greece, Israel, Malta, Portugal, Spain, Turkey, and the United Kingdom), Argentina, Brazil and Chile. The sample consists of adult pregnant and postpartum women (with infants up to 6 months of age). The assessment includes measures on COVID-19 epidemiology and public health measures (Oxford COVID-19 Government Response Tracker dataset), Coronavirus Perinatal Experiences (COPE questionnaires), psychological distress (BSI-18), depression (EPDS), anxiety (GAD-7) and post-traumatic stress symptoms (PTSD checklist for DSM-V)., Discussion: This study will provide important information for understanding the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on perinatal mental health and well-being, including the identification of potential risk and protective factors by implementing predictive models using machine learning techniques. The findings will help policymakers develop suitable guidelines and prevention strategies for perinatal mental health and contribute to designing tailored mental health interventions., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04595123 .

Hallucination-like experiences (HLEs) are typically defined as sensory perceptions in the absence of external stimuli. Multidimensional tools, able to assess different facets of HLEs, are helpful for a better characterization of hallucination proneness and to investigate the cross-national variation in the frequencies of HLEs. The current study set out to establish the validity, factor structure, and measurement invariance of the Launay-Slade Hallucinations Scale-Extended (LSHS-E), a tool to assess HLEs. A total of 4419 respondents from 10 countries were enrolled. Network analyses between the LSHS-E and the 3 dimensions of the Community Assessment of Psychic Experiences (CAPE) were performed to assess convergent and divergent validity of the LSHS-E. Confirmatory factor analysis was used to test its measurement invariance. The best fit was a 4-factor model, which proved invariant by country and clinical status, indicating cross-national stability of the hallucination-proneness construct. Among the different components of hallucination-proneness, auditory-visual HLEs had the strongest association with the positive dimension of the CAPE, compared with the depression and negative dimensions. Participants who reported a diagnosis of a mental disorder scored higher on the 4 LSHS-E factors. Small effect size differences by country were found in the scores of the 4 LSHS-E factors even after taking into account the role of socio-demographic and clinical variables. Due to its good psychometric properties, the LSHS-E is a strong candidate tool for large investigations of HLEs.

Unemployment is known to be associated with poor mental health, but it is not clear how strongly unemployment leads to onset of diagnosed clinical depression (causation), or if depression raises the risks of becoming unemployed (health selection), or indeed if both pathways operate. We therefore investigate the direction of associations between clinical depression and unemployment in a cross-cultural prospective cohort study. 10,059 consecutive general practice attendees (18-75 years) were recruited from six European countries and Chile between 2003 and 2004 and followed up at six, 12 and (in a subset) 24 months. The analysis sample was restricted to 3969 men and women who were employed or unemployed and seeking employment and had data on depression measures. The outcomes were depressive episodes, assessed using the Depression Section of the Composite International Diagnostic Interview (CIDI) and self-reported employment status. Among 3969 men and women with complete data on depression and unemployment, 10% (n = 393) had depression symptoms and a further 6% (n = 221) had major depression at 12 months. 11% (n = 423) of the sample were unemployed by 6 months. Participants who became unemployed between baseline and 6 months compared to those employed at both times had an adjusted relative risk ratio for 12-month depression of 1.58 (95% Confidence Interval 0.76, 3.27). Participants with depression at baseline and 6 months compared to neither time had an odds ratio for 6-month unemployment of 1.58 (95% Confidence Interval 0.97, 2.58). We found evidence that causation and (to a lesser extent) health selection raise the prevalence of depression in the unemployed. Unemployed adults are at particular risk for onset of major clinical depression and should be offered extra services or screened. Given the trend for adults with depression to perhaps be at greater risk of subsequent unemployment, employees with depressive symptoms should also be supported at work as a precautionary principle., (Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: The different incidence rates of, and risk factors for, depression in different countries argue for the need to have a specific risk algorithm for each country or a supranational risk algorithm. We aimed to develop and validate a predictD-Spain risk algorithm (PSRA) for the onset of major depression and to compare the performance of the PSRA with the predictD-Europe risk algorithm (PERA) in Spanish primary care., Method: A prospective cohort study with evaluations at baseline, 6 and 12 months. We measured 39 known risk factors and used multi-level logistic regression and inverse probability weighting to build the PSRA. In Spain (4574), Chile (2133) and another five European countries (5184), 11 891 non-depressed adult primary care attendees formed our at-risk population. The main outcome was DSM-IV major depression (CIDI)., Results: Six variables were patient characteristics or past events (sex, age, sex×age interaction, education, physical child abuse, and lifetime depression) and six were current status [Short Form 12 (SF-12) physical score, SF-12 mental score, dissatisfaction with unpaid work, number of serious problems in very close persons, dissatisfaction with living together at home, and taking medication for stress, anxiety or depression]. The C-index of the PSRA was 0.82 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.79-0.84]. The Integrated Discrimination Improvement (IDI) was 0.0558 [standard error (s.e.)=0.0071, Zexp=7.88, p<0.0001] mainly due to the increase in sensitivity. Both the IDI and calibration plots showed that the PSRA functioned better than the PERA in Spain., Conclusions: The PSRA included new variables and afforded an improved performance over the PERA for predicting the onset of major depression in Spain. However, the PERA is still the best option in other European countries.

Background: Little is known about the risk of progression to hazardous alcohol use in people currently drinking at safe limits. We aimed to develop a prediction model (predictAL) for the development of hazardous drinking in safe drinkers., Methods: A prospective cohort study of adult general practice attendees in six European countries and Chile followed up over 6 months. We recruited 10,045 attendees between April 2003 to February 2005. 6193 European and 2462 Chilean attendees recorded AUDIT scores below 8 in men and 5 in women at recruitment and were used in modelling risk. 38 risk factors were measured to construct a risk model for the development of hazardous drinking using stepwise logistic regression. The model was corrected for over fitting and tested in an external population. The main outcome was hazardous drinking defined by an AUDIT score ≥8 in men and ≥5 in women., Results: 69.0% of attendees were recruited, of whom 89.5% participated again after six months. The risk factors in the final predictAL model were sex, age, country, baseline AUDIT score, panic syndrome and lifetime alcohol problem. The predictAL model's average c-index across all six European countries was 0.839 (95% CI 0.805, 0.873). The Hedge's g effect size for the difference in log odds of predicted probability between safe drinkers in Europe who subsequently developed hazardous alcohol use and those who did not was 1.38 (95% CI 1.25, 1.51). External validation of the algorithm in Chilean safe drinkers resulted in a c-index of 0.781 (95% CI 0.717, 0.846) and Hedge's g of 0.68 (95% CI 0.57, 0.78)., Conclusions: The predictAL risk model for development of hazardous consumption in safe drinkers compares favourably with risk algorithms for disorders in other medical settings and can be a useful first step in prevention of alcohol misuse.

Background: Prevention of depression must address multiple risk factors. Estimating overall risk across a range of putative risk factors is fundamental to prevention of depression. However, we lack reliable and valid methods of risk estimation. This protocol paper introduces PREDICT, an international research study to address this risk estimation., Methods/design: This is a prospective study in which consecutive general practice attendees in six European countries are recruited and followed up after six and 12 months. Prevalence of depression is assessed at baseline and each follow-up point. Consecutive attendees between April 2003 and September 2004 who were aged 18 to 75 were asked to take part. The possibility of a depressive episode was assessed using the Depression Section of the Composite International Diagnostic Interview. A selection of presumed risk factors was based on our previous work and a systematic review of the literature. It was necessary to evaluate the test-retest reliability of a number of risk factor questions that were developed specifically, or adapted, for the PREDICT study. In a separate reliability study conducted between January and November 2003, consecutive general practice attendees in the six participating European countries completed the risk factor items on two occasions, two weeks apart. The overall response rate at entry to the study was 69%. We exceeded our expected recruitment rate, achieving a total of 10,048 people in all. Reliability coefficients were generally good to excellent., Discussion: Response rate to follow-up in all countries was uniformly high, which suggests that prediction will be based on almost a full cohort. The results of our reliability analysis are encouraging and suggest that data collected during the course of PREDICT will have a satisfactory level of stability. The development of a multi-factor risk score for depression will lay the foundation for future research on risk reduction in primary care. Our data will also provide the necessary evidence base on which to develop and evaluate interventions to reduce the prevalence of depression.