Search

Aims\ud Although many mental health care systems provide care interventions that are not related to direct health care, little is known about the interfaces between the latter and core health care. ‘Core health care’ refers to services whose explicit aim is direct clinical treatment which is usually provided by health professionals, i.e., physicians, nurses, psychologists. ‘Other care’ is typically provided by other staff and includes accommodation, training, promotion of independence, employment support and social skills. In such a definition, ‘other care’ does not necessarily mean being funded or governed differently. The aims of the study were: (1) using a standard classification system (Description and Evaluation of Services and Directories in Europe for Long Term Care, DESDE-LTC) to identify ‘core health’ and ‘other care’ services provided to adults with mental health problems; and (2) to investigate the balance of care by analysing the types and characteristics of core health and other care services.\ud \ud Methods\ud The study was conducted in eight selected local areas in eight European countries with different mental health systems. All publicly funded mental health services, regardless of the funding agency, for people over 18 years old were identified and coded. The availability, capacity and the workforce of the local mental health services were described using their functional main activity or ‘Main Types of Care’ (MTC) as the standard for international comparison, following the DESDE-LTC system.\ud \ud Results\ud In these European study areas, 822 MTCs were identified as providing core health care and 448 provided other types of care. Even though one-third of mental health services in the selected study areas provided interventions that were coded as ‘other care’, significant variation was found in the typology and characteristics of these services across the eight study areas.\ud \ud Conclusions\ud The functional distinction between core health and other care overcomes the traditional division between ‘health’ and ‘social’ sectors based on governance and funding. The overall balance between core health and other care services varied significantly across the European sites. Mental health systems cannot be understood or planned without taking into account the availability and capacity of all services specifically available for this target population, including those outside the health sector.

As part of the Roamer project, we sought to have a picture of the available mental health research (MHR) funding, capacity-building and infrastructures resources and to establish consensus-based recommendations that would allow an increase of European MHR resources and enable better use and accessibility to them. The methods fell into three sections (i) a review of the literature, (ii) a mental health-related keywords search within the Cordis(®), On-Course(®) and Meril(®) databases which contain information on European research funding, training and infrastructures. These reviews provided an overview that was presented to (iii) two experts workshops with 28 participants drawn from academic which identified gaps and produced recommendations. The literature review illustrates the debates in the scientific community on funding, training and infrastructures. The database searches estimated the fraction of health research resources available for mental health. Eight overarching goals for MHR resources were identified by the workshops; each of them was carried out with several practical recommendations. Resources for MHR are scarce considering the burden of mental disorders, the high rate of return of MHR and the under-investment of the field. The recommendations are urgently warranted to increase resources and their optimal access and use.

As part of the Roamer project, we aimed at revealing the share of health research budgets dedicated to mental health, as well as on the amounts allocated to such research for four European countries. Finland, France, Spain and the United Kingdom national public and non-profit funding allocated to mental health research in 2011 were investigated using, when possible, bottom-up approaches. Specifics of the data collection varied from country to country. The total amount of public and private not for profit mental health research funding for Finland, France, Spain and the UK was €10·2, €84·8, €16·8, and €127·6 million, respectively. Charities accounted for a quarter of the funding in the UK and less than six per cent elsewhere. The share of health research dedicated to mental health ranged from 4·0% in the UK to 9·7% in Finland. When compared to the DALY attributable to mental disorders, Spain, France, Finland, and the UK invested respectively €12·5, €31·2, €39·5, and €48·7 per DALY. Among these European countries, there is an important gap between the level of mental health research funding and the economic and epidemiologic burden of mental disorders.

Objective: Whereas employment has been shown to be beneficial for people with Major Depressive Disorder (MDD) across different cultures, employers’ attitudes have been shown to be negative towards workers with MDD. This may form an important barrier to work participation. Today, little is known about how stigma and discrimination affect work participation of workers with MDD, especially from their own perspective. We aimed to assess, in a working age population including respondents with MDD from 35 countries: (1) if people with MDD anticipate and experience discrimination when trying to find or keep paid employment; (2) if participants in high, middle and lower developed countries differ in these respects; and (3) if discrimination experiences are related to actual employment status (ie, having a paid job or not).Method: Participants in this cross-sectional study (N=834) had a diagnosis of MDD in the previous 12 months. They were interviewed using the Discrimination and Stigma Scale (DISC-12). Analysis of variance and generalised linear mixed models were used to analyse the data.Results: Overall, 62.5% had anticipated and/or experienced discrimination in the work setting. In very high developed countries, almost 60% of respondents had stopped themselves from applying for work, education or training because of anticipated discrimination. Having experienced workplace discrimination was independently related to unemployment.Conclusions: Across different countries and cultures, people with MDD very frequently reported discrimination in the work setting. Effective interventions are needed to enhance work participation in people with MDD, focusing simultaneously on decreasing stigma in the work environment and on decreasing self-discrimination by empowering workers with MDD.

Summary Background Many people with schizophrenia experience stigma caused by other people's knowledge, attitudes, and behaviour; this can lead to impoverishment, social marginalisation, and low quality of life. We aimed to describe the nature, direction, and severity of anticipated and experienced discrimination reported by people with schizophrenia. Methods We did a cross-sectional survey in 27 countries, in centres affiliated to the INDIGO Research Network, by use of face-to-face interviews with 732 participants with schizophrenia. Discrimination was measured with the newly validated discrimination and stigma scale (DISC), which produces three subscores: positive experienced discrimination; negative experienced discrimination; and anticipated discrimination. Findings Negative discrimination was experienced by 344 (47%) of 729 participants in making or keeping friends, by 315 (43%) of 728 from family members, by 209 (29%) of 724 in finding a job, 215 (29%) of 730 in keeping a job, and by 196 (27%) of 724 in intimate or sexual relationships. Positive experienced discrimination was rare. Anticipated discrimination affected 469 (64%) in applying for work, training, or education and 402 (55%) looking for a close relationship; 526 (72%) felt the need to conceal their diagnosis. Over a third of participants anticipated discrimination for job seeking and close personal relationships when no discrimination was experienced. Interpretation Rates of both anticipated and experienced discrimination are consistently high across countries among people with mental illness. Measures such as disability discrimination laws might, therefore, not be effective without interventions to improve self-esteem of people with mental illness. Funding South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trustees, UK Department of Health SHiFT programme, German Ministry of Education and Research.

Depression is the third leading contributor to the worldwide burden of disease. We assessed the nature and severity of experienced and anticipated discrimination reported by adults with major depressive disorder worldwide. Moreover, we investigated whether experienced discrimination is related to clinical history, provision of health care, and disclosure of diagnosis and whether anticipated discrimination is associated with disclosure and previous experiences of discrimination. In a cross-sectional survey, people with a diagnosis of major depressive disorder were interviewed in 39 sites (35 countries) worldwide with the discrimination and stigma scale (version 12 ; DISC-12). Other inclusion criteria were ability to understand and speak the main local language and age 18 years or older. The DISC-12 subscores assessed were reported discrimination and anticipated discrimination. Multivariable regression was used to analyse the data. 1082 people with depression completed the DISC-12. Of these, 855 (79%) reported experiencing discrimination in at least one life domain. 405 (37%) participants had stopped themselves from initiating a close personal relationship, 271 (25%) from applying for work, and 218 (20%) from applying for education or training. We noted that higher levels of experienced discrimination were associated with several lifetime depressive episodes (negative binomial regression coefficient 0·20 [95% CI 0·09-0·32], p=0·001) ; at least one lifetime psychiatric hospital admission (0·29 [0·15-0·42], p=0·001) ; poorer levels of social functioning (widowed, separated, or divorced 0·10 [0·01-0·19], p=0·032 ; unpaid employed 0·34 [0·09-0·60], p=0·007 ; looking for a job 0·26 [0·09-0·43], p=0·002 ; and unemployed 0·22 [0·03-0·41], p=0·022). Experienced discrimination was also associated with lower willingness to disclose a diagnosis of depression (mean discrimination score 4·18 [SD 3·68] for concealing depression vs 2·25 [2·65] for disclosing depression ; p

BackgroundNo study has so far explored differences in discrimination reported by people with major depressive disorder (MDD) across countries and cultures.AimsTo (a) compare reported discrimination across different countries, and (b) explore the relative weight of individual and contextual factors in explaining levels of reported discrimination in people with MDD.MethodCross-sectional multisite international survey (34 countries worldwide) of 1082 people with MDD. Experienced and anticipated discrimination were assessed by the Discrimination and Stigma Scale (DISC). Countries were classified according to their rating on the Human Development Index (HDI). Multilevel negative binomial and Poisson models were used.ResultsPeople living in ‘very high HDI’ countries reported higher discrimination than those in ‘medium/low HDI’ countries. Variation in reported discrimination across countries was only partially explained by individual-level variables. The contribution of country-level variables was significant for anticipated discrimination only.ConclusionsContextual factors play an important role in anticipated discrimination. Country-specific interventions should be implemented to prevent discrimination towards people with MDD.

Background: previous studies have shown that maternal grand multiparity may predict an increased risk of mental disorders in young adult offspring, but whether such effects persist throughout adulthood remains unknown. The current study examined if maternal grand multiparity predicts the risks of severe mental disorders, suicides, suicide attempts and dementias throughout adult life.Methods: our study sample comprised 13243 Helsinki Birth Cohort Study 1934–1944 participants (6905 men and 6338 women). According to hospital birth records, 341 offspring were born to grand multiparous mothers. From Finnish national hospital discharge and causes of death registers, we identified 1682 participants diagnosed with mental disorders during 1969–2010.Results: maternal grand multiparity predicted significantly increased risks of mood disorders (Hazard Ratio = 1.64, p = 0.03), non-psychotic mood disorders (Hazard Ratio = 2.02, p = 0.002), and suicide attempts (Hazard Ratio = 3.94, p = 0.01) in adult offspring. Furthermore, women born to grand multiparous mothers had significantly increased risks of any severe mental disorder (Hazard Ratio = 1.79, p = 0.01), non-psychotic substance use disorders (Hazard Ratio = 2.77, p = 0.02) schizophrenia, schizotypal and delusional disorders (Hazard Ratio = 2.40, p = 0.02), mood disorders (Hazard Ratio = 2.40, p = 0.002), non-psychotic mood disorders (Hazard Ratio = 2.91, pConclusions: women born to grand multiparous mothers are at an increased risk of severe mental disorders and suicide attempts across adulthood. Our findings may inform the development of preventive interventions for mental disorders

Background Depression is the third leading contributor to the worldwide burden of disease. We assessed the nature and severity of experienced and anticipated discrimination reported by adults with major depressive disorder worldwide. Moreover, we investigated whether experienced discrimination is related to clinical history, provision of health care, and disclosure of diagnosis and whether anticipated discrimination is associated with disclosure and previous experiences of discrimination. Methods In a cross-sectional survey, people with a diagnosis of major depressive disorder were interviewed in 39 sites (35 countries) worldwide with the discrimination and stigma scale (version 12; DISC-12). Other inclusion criteria were ability to understand and speak the main local language and age 18 years or older. The DISC-12 subscores assessed were reported discrimination and anticipated discrimination. Multivariable regression was used to analyse the data. Findings 1082 people with depression completed the DISC-12. Of these, 855 (79%) reported experiencing discrimination in at least one life domain. 405 (37%) participants had stopped themselves from initiating a close personal relationship, 271 (25%) from applying for work, and 218 (20%) from applying for education or training. We noted that higher levels of experienced discrimination were associated with several lifetime depressive episodes (negative binomial regression coeffi cient 0·20 [95% CI 0·09-0·32], p=0·001); at least one lifetime psychiatric hospital admission (0·29 [0·15-0·42], p=0·001); poorer levels of social functioning (widowed, separated, or divorced 0·10 [0·01-0·19], p=0·032; unpaid employed 0·34 [0·09-0·60], p=0·007; looking for a job 0·26 [0·09-0·43], p=0·002; and unemployed 0·22 [0·03-0·41], p=0·022). Experienced discrimination was also associated with lower willingness to disclose a diagnosis of depression (mean discrimination score 4·18 [SD 3·68] for concealing depression vs 2·25 [2·65] for disclosing depression; p lt 0·0001). Anticipated discrimination is not necessarily associated with experienced discrimination because 147 (47%) of 316 participants who anticipated discrimination in fi nding or keeping a job and 160 (45%) of 353 in their intimate relationships had not experienced discrimination. Interpretation Discrimination related to depression acts as a barrier to social participation and successful vocational integration. Non-disclosure of depression is itself a further barrier to seeking help and to receiving eff ective treatment. This finding suggests that new and sustained approaches are needed to prevent stigmatisation of people with depression and reduce the eff ects of stigma when it is already established. Funding European Commission, Directorate General for Health and Consumers, Public Health Executive Agency.

The aim of this study was to evaluate the level of anticipated discrimination in people with schizophrenia (n = 732) from 27 countries in the International Study of Discrimination and Stigma Outcomes (INDIGO).Anticipated discrimination was assessed through four questions of Discrimination and Stigma Scale. Twenty-five individuals were identified at each site who were reasonably representative of all such treated cases within the local area.Sixty-four per cent of the participants reported that they had stopped themselves from applying for work, training or education because of anticipated discrimination. Seventy-two per cent of them reported that they felt the need to conceal their diagnosis. Expecting to be avoided by others who know about their diagnosis was highly associated with decisions to conceal their diagnosis. Those who concealed their diagnosis were younger and more educated. The participants who perceived discrimination by others were more likely to stop themselves from looking for a close relationship. Anticipated discrimination in finding and keeping work was more common in the absence than in the presence of experienced discrimination, and the similar findings applied to intimate relationships.This study shows that anticipated discrimination among people with schizophrenia is common, but is not necessarily associated with experienced discrimination.

OBJECTIVE: The extent of disagreement between large and smaller randomized, controlled trials on mental health issues is unknown. The authors aimed to compare the results of large versus smaller trials on mental health-related interventions. METHOD: The authors screened 161 Cochrane and 254 Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effectiveness systematic reviews on mental health-related interventions. They identified 16 meta-analyses with at least one "large" randomized trial with sample size >800 and at least one "smaller" trial. Effect sizes were calculated separately for large and smaller trials. Heterogeneity was assessed between all studies, within each group (large and smaller studies), and between large and smaller studies. RESULTS: Significant between-study heterogeneity was seen in five meta-analyses. By random-effects calculations, the results of large and smaller trials differed beyond chance in four meta-analyses (25%). In three of these disagreements (effect of day care on IQ, discontinuation of antidepressants, risperidone versus typical antipsychotics for schizophrenia), the smaller trials showed greater effect sizes than the large trials. The inverse was seen in one case (olanzapine versus typical antipsychotics for schizophrenia). With fixed-effects models, disagreements beyond chance occurred in five cases (31%). In four meta-analyses, the effect size differed over twofold between large and smaller trials. Various quality and design parameters were identified as potential explanations for some disagreements. CONCLUSIONS: Large trials are uncommon in mental health. Their results are usually comparable with the results of smaller studies, but major disagreements do occur. Both large and smaller trials should be scrutinized as they offer a continuum of randomized evidence. Am J Psychiatry

OBJECTIVE: The authors aimed to evaluate the adequacy of the reporting of safety information in publications of randomized trials of mental-health-related interventions. METHOD: The authors randomly selected 200 entries from the PsiTri registry of mental-health-related controlled trials. This yielded 142 randomized trials that were analyzed for adequacy and relative emphasis of their content on safety issues. They examined drug trials as well as trials of other types of interventions. RESULTS: Across the 142 eligible trials, 103 involved drugs. Twenty-five of the 142 trials had at least 100 randomly chosen subjects and at least 50 subjects in a study arm. Among drug trials, only 21.4% had adequate reporting of clinical adverse events, and only 16.5% had adequate reporting of laboratory-determined toxicity, while 32.0% reported both the numbers and the reasons for withdrawals due to toxicity in each arm. On average, drug trials devoted 1/10 of a page in their results sections to safety, and 58.3% devoted more space to the names and affiliations of authors than to safety. None of the trials of nondrug interventions had adequate or even partially adequate reporting of either clinical adverse events or laboratory-determined toxicity. In multivariate modeling, long-term trials and trials conducted in the United States devoted even less space to safety, while schizophrenia trials devoted more space to safety than did trials in other areas. CONCLUSIONS: Safety reporting is largely neglected across trials of mental-health-related interventions, thus hindering the assessment of risk-benefit ratios for rational decision making in mental health care. Am J Psychiatry

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Meta-analyses of randomized trials may incorporate new evidence, and estimated treatment effects changeover time. We evaluated whether the certainty and estimates of efficacy and tolerability of mental health interventions change over time, as more trials appear on the same topics. METHODS: One hundred meta-analyses (1,024 trial entries; 99,303 participants) with an outcome of death, relapse, failure or dropout and with five or more trials published in three or more different years were examined with cumulative meta-analysis and recursive cumulative meta-analysis. RESULTS: Eight meta-analyses reached formal statistical significance (P < .05) at some point, but lost this significance eventually when more trials were published; typically large effect sizes in early trials were dissipated with further evidence. With 500 randomized subjects,95% of the time, subsequent changes in odds ratio might be up to 1.5-fold. For death, relapse, and failure outcomes, a decrease in effect size was somewhat more common than an increase, when more data became available (157 vs. 125, P = .06). This was most clear for comparisons of pharmacotherapies versus placebo (79 vs. 51, P = .009). CONCLUSIONS: Evidence based on a small number of randomized subjects should be interpreted cautiously. Early treatment efficacy of pharmacotherapies is occasionally overestimated. J Clin Epidemiol