Twins early development study (teds): A genetically sensitive investigation of mental health outcomes in the mid-twenties

The Twins Early Development Study (TEDS) is a longitudinal study following a cohort of twins born 1994-1996 in England and Wales. Of the 13,759 families who originally consented to take part, over 10,000 families remain enrolled in the study. The current focus of TEDS is on mental health in the mid-twenties. Making use of over 25 years of genetically sensitive data, TEDS is uniquely placed to explore the longitudinal genetic and environmental influences on common mental health disorders in early adulthood. This paper outlines recent data collection efforts supporting this work, including a cohort-wide mental health assessment at age 26 and a multi-phase Covid-19 study. It will also provide an update on data linkage efforts and the Children of TEDS (CoTEDS) project. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved)

Moral injury and psychological wellbeing in UK healthcare staff.

BACKGROUND: Potentially morally injurious events (PMIEs) can negatively impact mental health. The COVID-19 pandemic may have placed healthcare staff at risk of moral injury. AIM: To examine the impact of PMIE on healthcare staff wellbeing. METHODS: Twelve thousand nine hundred and sixty-five healthcare staff (clinical and non-clinical) were recruited from 18 NHS-England trusts into a survey of PMIE exposure and wellbeing. RESULTS: PMIEs were significantly associated with adverse mental health symptoms across healthcare staff. Specific work factors were significantly associated with experiences of moral injury, including being redeployed, lack of PPE, and having a colleague die of COVID-19. Nurses who reported symptoms of mental disorders were more likely to report all forms of PMIEs than those without symptoms (AOR 2.7; 95% CI 2.2, 3.3). Doctors who reported symptoms were only more likely to report betrayal events, such as breach of trust by colleagues (AOR 2.7, 95% CI 1.5, 4.9). CONCLUSION: A considerable proportion of NHS healthcare staff in both clinical and non-clinical roles report exposure to PMIEs during the COVID-19 pandemic. Prospective research is needed to identify the direction of causation between moral injury and mental disorder as well as continuing to monitor the longer term outcomes of exposure to PMIEs.

The Impact of COVID-19 Lockdown on Adults with Major Depressive Disorder from Catalonia: A Decentralized Longitudinal Study.

The present study analyzes the effects of each containment phase of the first COVID-19 wave on depression levels in a cohort of 121 adults with a history of major depressive disorder (MDD) from Catalonia recruited from 1 November 2019, to 16 October 2020. This analysis is part of the Remote Assessment of Disease and Relapse-MDD (RADAR-MDD) study. Depression was evaluated with the Patient Health Questionnaire-8 (PHQ-8), and anxiety was evaluated with the Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7 (GAD-7). Depression's levels were explored across the phases (pre-lockdown, lockdown, and four post-lockdown phases) according to the restrictions of Spanish/Catalan governments. Then, a mixed model was fitted to estimate how depression varied over the phases. A significant rise in depression severity was found during the lockdown and phase 0 (early post-lockdown), compared with the pre-lockdown. Those with low pre-lockdown depression experienced an increase in depression severity during the "new normality", while those with high pre-lockdown depression decreased compared with the pre-lockdown. These findings suggest that COVID-19 restrictions affected the depression level depending on their pre-lockdown depression severity. Individuals with low levels of depression are more reactive to external stimuli than those with more severe depression, so the lockdown may have worse detrimental effects on them.

Risk and protective factors for new-onset binge eating, low weight, and self-harm symptoms in >35,000 individuals in the UK during the COVID-19 pandemic.

OBJECTIVE: The disruption caused by the COVID-19 pandemic has been associated with poor mental health, including increases in eating disorders and self-harm symptoms. We investigated risk and protective factors for the new onset of these symptoms during the pandemic. METHOD: Data were from the COVID-19 Psychiatry and Neurological Genetics study and the Repeated Assessment of Mental health in Pandemics Study (n = 36,715). Exposures were socio-demographic characteristics, lifetime psychiatric disorder, and COVID-related variables, including SARS-CoV-2 infection/illness with COVID-19. We identified four subsamples of participants without pre-pandemic experience of our outcomes: binge eating (n = 24,211), low weight (n = 24,364), suicidal and/or self-harm ideation (n = 18,040), and self-harm (n = 29,948). Participants reported on our outcomes at frequent intervals (fortnightly to monthly). We fitted multiple logistic regression models to identify factors associated with the new onset of our outcomes. RESULTS: Within each subsample, new onset was reported by: 21% for binge eating, 10.8% for low weight, 23.5% for suicidal and/or self-harm ideation, and 3.5% for self-harm. Shared risk factors included having a lifetime psychiatric disorder, not being in paid employment, higher pandemic worry scores, and being racially minoritized. Conversely, infection with SARS-CoV-2/illness with COVID-19 was linked to lower odds of binge eating, low weight, and suicidal and/or self-harm ideation. DISCUSSION: Overall, we detected shared risk factors that may drive the comorbidity between eating disorders and self-harm. Subgroups of individuals with these risk factors may require more frequent monitoring during future pandemics. PUBLIC SIGNIFICANCE: In a sample of 35,000 UK residents, people who had a psychiatric disorder, identified as being part of a racially minoritized group, were not in paid employment, or were more worried about the pandemic were more likely to experience binge eating, low weight, suicidal and/or self-harm ideation, and self-harm for the first time during the pandemic. People with these risk factors may need particular attention during future pandemics to enable early identification of new psychiatric symptoms.

'You get looked at like you're failing': A reflexive thematic analysis of experiences of mental health and wellbeing support for NHS staff.

Staff in the National Health Service (NHS) are under considerable strain, exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic; whilst NHS Trusts provide a variety of health and wellbeing support services, there has been little research investigating staff perceptions of these services. We interviewed 48 healthcare workers from 18 NHS Trusts in England about their experiences of workplace health and wellbeing support during the pandemic. Reflexive thematic analysis identified that perceived stigma around help-seeking, and staffing shortages due to wider socio-political contexts such as austerity, were barriers to using support services. Visible, caring leadership at all levels (CEO to line managers), peer support, easily accessible services, and clear communication about support offers were enablers. Our evidence suggests Trusts should have active strategies to improve help-seeking, such as manager training and peer support facilitated by building in time for this during working hours, but this will require long-term strategic planning to address workforce shortages.

Prevalence of post-traumatic stress disorder and common mental disorders in health-care workers in England during the COVID-19 pandemic: a two-phase cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies on the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the mental health of health-care workers have relied on self-reported screening measures to estimate the point prevalence of common mental disorders. Screening measures, which are designed to be sensitive, have low positive predictive value and often overestimate prevalence. We aimed to estimate prevalence of common mental disorders and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) among health-care workers in England using diagnostic interviews. METHODS: We did a two-phase, cross-sectional study comprising diagnostic interviews within a larger multisite longitudinal cohort of health-care workers (National Health Service [NHS] CHECK; n=23 462) during the COVID-19 pandemic. In the first phase, health-care workers across 18 NHS England Trusts were recruited. Baseline assessments were done using online surveys between April 24, 2020, and Jan 15, 2021. In the second phase, we selected a proportion of participants who had responded to the surveys and conducted diagnostic interviews to establish the prevalence of mental disorders. The recruitment period for the diagnostic interviews was between March 1, 2021 and Aug 27, 2021. Participants were screened with the 12-item General Health Questionnaire (GHQ-12) and assessed with the Clinical Interview Schedule-Revised (CIS-R) for common mental disorders or were screened with the 6-item Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder Checklist (PCL-6) and assessed with the Clinician Administered PTSD Scale for DSM-5 (CAPS-5) for PTSD. FINDINGS: The screening sample contained 23 462 participants: 2079 participants were excluded due to missing values on the GHQ-12 and 11 147 participants due to missing values on the PCL-6. 243 individuals participated in diagnostic interviews for common mental disorders (CIS-R; mean age 42 years [range 21-70]; 185 [76%] women and 58 [24%] men) and 94 individuals participated in diagnostic interviews for PTSD (CAPS-5; mean age 44 years [23-62]; 79 [84%] women and 15 [16%] men). 202 (83%) of 243 individuals in the common mental disorders sample and 83 (88%) of 94 individuals in the PTSD sample were White. GHQ-12 screening caseness for common mental disorders was 52·8% (95% CI 51·7-53·8). Using CIS-R diagnostic interviews, the estimated population prevalence of generalised anxiety disorder was 14·3% (10·4-19·2), population prevalence of depression was 13·7% (10·1-18·3), and combined population prevalence of generalised anxiety disorder and depression was 21·5% (16·9-26·8). PCL-6 screening caseness for PTSD was 25·4% (24·3-26·5). Using CAPS-5 diagnostic interviews, the estimated population prevalence of PTSD was 7·9% (4·0-15·1). INTERPRETATION: The prevalence estimates of common mental disorders and PTSD in health-care workers were considerably lower when assessed using diagnostic interviews compared with screening tools. 21·5% of health-care workers met the threshold for diagnosable mental disorders, and thus might benefit from clinical intervention. FUNDING: UK Medical Research Council; UCL/Wellcome; Rosetrees Trust; NHS England and Improvement; Economic and Social Research Council; National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Biomedical Research Centre at the Maudsley and King's College London (KCL); NIHR Protection Research Unit in Emergency Preparedness and Response at KCL.

Biopsychosocial Response to the COVID-19 Lockdown in People with Major Depressive Disorder and Multiple Sclerosis.

BACKGROUND: Changes in lifestyle, finances and work status during COVID-19 lockdowns may have led to biopsychosocial changes in people with pre-existing vulnerabilities such as Major Depressive Disorders (MDDs) and Multiple Sclerosis (MS). METHODS: Data were collected as a part of the RADAR-CNS (Remote Assessment of Disease and Relapse-Central Nervous System) program. We analyzed the following data from long-term participants in a decentralized multinational study: symptoms of depression, heart rate (HR) during the day and night; social activity; sedentary state, steps and physical activity of varying intensity. Linear mixed-effects regression analyses with repeated measures were fitted to assess the changes among three time periods (pre, during and post-lockdown) across the groups, adjusting for depression severity before the pandemic and gender. RESULTS: Participants with MDDs (N = 255) and MS (N = 214) were included in the analyses. Overall, depressive symptoms remained stable across the three periods in both groups. A lower mean HR and HR variation were observed between pre and during lockdown during the day for MDDs and during the night for MS. HR variation during rest periods also decreased between pre- and post-lockdown in both clinical conditions. We observed a reduction in physical activity for MDDs and MS upon the introduction of lockdowns. The group with MDDs exhibited a net increase in social interaction via social network apps over the three periods. CONCLUSIONS: Behavioral responses to the lockdown measured by social activity, physical activity and HR may reflect changes in stress in people with MDDs and MS. Remote technology monitoring might promptly activate an early warning of physical and social alterations in these stressful situations. Future studies must explore how stress does or does not impact depression severity.

'It hurts your heart': frontline healthcare worker experiences of moral injury during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Background: Moral injury is defined as the strong emotional and cognitive reactions following events which clash with someone's moral code, values or expectations. During the COVID-19 pandemic, increased exposure to Potentially Morally Injurious Events (PMIEs) has placed healthcare workers (HCWs) at risk of moral injury. Yet little is known about the lived experience of cumulative PMIE exposure and how NHS staff respond to this. Objective: We sought to rectify this knowledge gap by qualitatively exploring the lived experiences and perspectives of clinical frontline NHS staff who responded to COVID-19. Methods: We recruited a diverse sample of 30 clinical frontline HCWs from the NHS CHECK study cohort, for single time point qualitative interviews. All participants endorsed at least one item on the 9-item Moral Injury Events Scale (MIES) [Nash et al., 2013. Psychometric evaluation of the moral injury events scale. Military Medicine, 178(6), 646-652] at six month follow up. Interviews followed a semi-structured guide and were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis. Results: HCWs described being routinely exposed to ethical conflicts, created by exacerbations of pre-existing systemic issues including inadequate staffing and resourcing. We found that HCWs experienced a range of mental health symptoms primarily related to perceptions of institutional betrayal as well as feeling unable to fulfil their duty of care towards patients. Conclusion: These results suggest that a multi-facetted organisational strategy is warranted to prepare for PMIE exposure, promote opportunities for resolution of symptoms associated with moral injury and prevent organisational disengagement. HIGHLIGHTS Clinical frontline healthcare workers (HCWs) have been exposed to an accumulation of potentially morally injurious events (PMIEs) throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, including feeling betrayed by both government and NHS leaders as well as feeling unable to provide duty of care to patients.HCWs described the significant adverse impact of this exposure on their mental health, including increased anxiety and depression symptoms and sleep disturbance.Most HCWs interviewed believed that organisational change within the NHS was necessary to prevent excess PMIE exposure and promote resolution of moral distress.

Antecedentes: El daño moral se define como las fuertes reacciones emocionales y cognitivas que siguen a los eventos que chocan con el código moral de una persona, sus valores o expectativas. Durante la pandemia de COVID-19, el aumento de la exposición a Eventos Potencialmente Dañinos para la Moral (PMIEs, por su sigla en inglés) ha puesto a los trabajadores de la salud (HCWs, por su sigla en inglés) en riesgo de daño moral. Aún se conoce poco sobre la experiencia vivida de la exposición acumulada a PMIE y cómo el personal del Servicio Nacional de Salud de Inglaterra (NHS en su sigla en inglés) responde a esto.Objetivo: Buscamos rectificar esta brecha de conocimiento a través de la exploración cualitativa de las experiencias vividas y perspectivas del personal clínico de primera línea de NHS que respondió al COVID-19.Métodos: Reclutamos una muestra diversa de 30 HCWs clínicos de primera línea de la cohorte del estudio CHECK del NHS, para entrevistas cualitativas de una sola vez. Todos los participantes aprobaron al menos un ítem de los 9 de la Escala de Eventos de Daño Moral (MIES) [Nash y cols., 2013. Psychometric evaluation of the moral injury events scale. Military Medicine, 178(6), 646­652] en el seguimiento a los 6 meses. Las entrevistas siguieron una guía semi-estructurada y fueron analizadas utilizando análisis temático reflexivo.Resultados: Los HCWs describieron estar expuestos de forma rutinaria a conflictos éticos, creados por exacerbación de problemas sistémicos pre-existentes que incluían falta de personal y de recursos. Encontramos que los HCWs experimentaron un rango de síntomas de salud mental primariamente relacionados a percepciones de traición institucional y al sentirse incapaces de cumplir con su deber de cuidado hacia los pacientes.Conclusión: Estos resultados sugieren que se requiere una estrategia organizacional multifacética para preparar para la exposición a PMIE fomentar oportunidades de resolución de los síntomas asociados al daño moral y prevenir la separación organizacional.

‘It hurts your heart’: frontline healthcare worker experiences of moral injury during the COVID-19 pandemic ‘Duele tu corazón’: experiencias de daño moral durante la pandemia de COVID-19 en trabajadores de la salud de primera línea ‘它伤了你的心’：在 COVID-19 疫情期间一线医护人员的道德伤害经历

Background: Moral injury is defined as the strong emotional and cognitive reactions following events which clash with someone’s moral code, values or expectations. During the COVID-19 pandemic, increased exposure to Potentially Morally Injurious Events (PMIEs) has placed healthcare workers (HCWs) at risk of moral injury. Yet little is known about the lived experience of cumulative PMIE exposure and how NHS staff respond to this. Objective: We sought to rectify this knowledge gap by qualitatively exploring the lived experiences and perspectives of clinical frontline NHS staff who responded to COVID-19. Methods: We recruited a diverse sample of 30 clinical frontline HCWs from the NHS CHECK study cohort, for single time point qualitative interviews. All participants endorsed at least one item on the 9-item Moral Injury Events Scale (MIES) [Nash et al., 2013. Psychometric evaluation of the moral injury events scale. Military Medicine, 178(6), 646–652] at six month follow up. Interviews followed a semi-structured guide and were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis. Results: HCWs described being routinely exposed to ethical conflicts, created by exacerbations of pre-existing systemic issues including inadequate staffing and resourcing. We found that HCWs experienced a range of mental health symptoms primarily related to perceptions of institutional betrayal as well as feeling unable to fulfil their duty of care towards patients. Conclusion: These results suggest that a multi-facetted organisational strategy is warranted to prepare for PMIE exposure, promote opportunities for resolution of symptoms associated with moral injury and prevent organisational disengagement. HIGHLIGHTS Clinical frontline healthcare workers (HCWs) have been exposed to an accumulation of potentially morally injurious events (PMIEs) throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, including feeling betrayed by both government and NHS leaders as well as feeling unable to provide duty of care to patients. HCWs described the significant adverse impact of this exposure on their mental health, including increased anxiety and depression symptoms and sleep disturbance. Most HCWs interviewed believed that organisational change within the NHS was necessary to prevent excess PMIE exposure and promote resolution of moral distress.

Capturing the experiences of UK healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic: A structural topic modelling analysis of 7,412 free-text survey responses.

BACKGROUND: Healthcare workers (HCWs) have provided vital services during the COVID-19 pandemic, but existing research consists of quantitative surveys (lacking in depth or context) or qualitative interviews (with limited generalisability). Structural Topic Modelling (STM) of large-scale free-text survey data offers a way of capturing the perspectives of a wide range of HCWs in their own words about their experiences of the pandemic. METHODS: In an online survey distributed to all staff at 18 geographically dispersed NHS Trusts, we asked respondents, "Is there anything else you think we should know about your experiences of the COVID-19 pandemic?". We used STM on 7,412 responses to identify topics, and thematic analysis on the resultant topics and text excerpts. RESULTS: We identified 33 topics, grouped into two domains, each containing four themes. Our findings emphasise: the deleterious effect of increased workloads, lack of PPE, inconsistent advice/guidance, and lack of autonomy; differing experiences of home working as negative/positive; and the benefits of supportive leadership and peers in ameliorating challenges. Themes varied by demographics and time: discussion of home working decreasing over time, while discussion of workplace challenges increased. Discussion of mental health was lowest between September-November 2020, between the first and second waves of COVID-19 in the UK. DISCUSSION: Our findings represent the most salient experiences of HCWs through the pandemic. STM enabled statistical examination of how the qualitative themes raised differed according to participant characteristics. This relatively underutilised methodology in healthcare research can provide more nuanced, yet generalisable, evidence than that available via surveys or small interview studies, and should be used in future research.

Indicators of recent COVID-19 infection status: findings from a large occupational cohort of staff and postgraduate research students from a UK university.

BACKGROUND: Researchers conducting cohort studies may wish to investigate the effect of episodes of COVID-19 illness on participants. A definitive diagnosis of COVID-19 is not always available, so studies have to rely on proxy indicators. This paper seeks to contribute evidence that may assist the use and interpretation of these COVID-indicators. METHODS: We described five potential COVID-indicators: self-reported core symptoms, a symptom algorithm; self-reported suspicion of COVID-19; self-reported external results; and home antibody testing based on a 'lateral flow' antibody (IgG/IgM) test cassette. Included were staff and postgraduate research students at a large London university who volunteered for the study and were living in the UK in June 2020. Excluded were those who did not return a valid antibody test result. We provide descriptive statistics of prevalence and overlap of the five indicators. RESULTS: Core symptoms were the most common COVID-indicator (770/1882 participants positive, 41%), followed by suspicion of COVID-19 (n = 509/1882, 27%), a positive symptom algorithm (n = 298/1882, 16%), study antibody lateral flow positive (n = 124/1882, 7%) and a positive external test result (n = 39/1882, 2%), thus a 20-fold difference between least and most common. Meeting any one indicator increased the likelihood of all others, with concordance between 65 and 94%. Report of a low suspicion of having had COVID-19 predicted a negative antibody test in 98%, but positive suspicion predicted a positive antibody test in only 20%. Those who reported previous external antibody tests were more likely to have received a positive result from the external test (24%) than the study test (15%). CONCLUSIONS: Our results support the use of proxy indicators of past COVID-19, with the caveat that none is perfect. Differences from previous antibody studies, most significantly in lower proportions of participants positive for antibodies, may be partly due to a decline in antibody detection over time. Subsequent to our study, vaccination may have further complicated the interpretation of COVID-indicators, only strengthening the need to critically evaluate what criteria should be used to define COVID-19 cases when designing studies and interpreting study results.

Using digital health tools for the Remote Assessment of Treatment Prognosis in Depression (RAPID): a study protocol for a feasibility study

IntroductionDigital health tools such as smartphones and wearable devices could improve psychological treatment outcomes in depression through more accurate and comprehensive measures of patient behaviour. However, in this emerging field, most studies are small and based on student populations outside of a clinical setting. The current study aims to determine the feasibility and acceptability of using smartphones and wearable devices to collect behavioural and clinical data in people undergoing therapy for depressive disorders and establish the extent to which they can be potentially useful biomarkers of depression and recovery after treatment.Methods and analysisThis is an observational, prospective cohort study of 65 people attending psychological therapy for depression in multiple London-based sites. It will collect continuous passive data from smartphone sensors and a Fitbit fitness tracker, and deliver questionnaires, speech tasks and cognitive assessments through smartphone-based apps. Objective data on sleep, physical activity, location, Bluetooth contact, smartphone use and heart rate will be gathered for 7 months, and compared with clinical and contextual data. A mixed methods design, including a qualitative interview of patient experiences, will be used to evaluate key feasibility indicators, digital phenotypes of depression and therapy prognosis. Patient and public involvement was sought for participant-facing documents and the study design of the current research proposal.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval has been obtained from the London Westminster Research Ethics Committee, and the Health Research Authority, Integrated Research Application System (project ID: 270918). Privacy and confidentiality will be guaranteed and the procedures for handling, processing, storage and destruction of the data will comply with the General Data Protection Regulation. Findings from this study will form part of a doctoral thesis, will be presented at national and international meetings or academic conferences and will generate manuscripts to be submitted to peer-reviewed journals.Trial registration numberhttps://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/PMYTA

Longitudinal Relationships Between Depressive Symptom Severity and Phone-Measured Mobility: Dynamic Structural Equation Modeling Study.

BACKGROUND: The mobility of an individual measured by phone-collected location data has been found to be associated with depression; however, the longitudinal relationships (the temporal direction of relationships) between depressive symptom severity and phone-measured mobility have yet to be fully explored. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to explore the relationships and the direction of the relationships between depressive symptom severity and phone-measured mobility over time. METHODS: Data used in this paper came from a major EU program, called the Remote Assessment of Disease and Relapse-Major Depressive Disorder, which was conducted in 3 European countries. Depressive symptom severity was measured with the 8-item Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-8) through mobile phones every 2 weeks. Participants' location data were recorded by GPS and network sensors in mobile phones every 10 minutes, and 11 mobility features were extracted from location data for the 2 weeks prior to the PHQ-8 assessment. Dynamic structural equation modeling was used to explore the longitudinal relationships between depressive symptom severity and phone-measured mobility. RESULTS: This study included 2341 PHQ-8 records and corresponding phone-collected location data from 290 participants (age: median 50.0 IQR 34.0, 59.0) years; of whom 215 (74.1%) were female, and 149 (51.4%) were employed. Significant negative correlations were found between depressive symptom severity and phone-measured mobility, and these correlations were more significant at the within-individual level than the between-individual level. For the direction of relationships over time, Homestay (time at home) (φ=0.09, P=.01), Location Entropy (time distribution on different locations) (φ=-0.04, P=.02), and Residential Location Count (reflecting traveling) (φ=0.05, P=.02) were significantly correlated with the subsequent changes in the PHQ-8 score, while changes in the PHQ-8 score significantly affected (φ=-0.07, P<.001) the subsequent periodicity of mobility. CONCLUSIONS: Several phone-derived mobility features have the potential to predict future depression, which may provide support for future clinical applications, relapse prevention, and remote mental health monitoring practices in real-world settings.

Trajectories of mental health among UK university staff and postgraduate students during the pandemic.

OBJECTIVES: The COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted the social and working lives of many. Past studies have highlighted worsening mental health during the pandemic, but often rely on small samples or infrequent follow-up. This study draws on fortnightly assessments from a large occupational cohort to describe differing trajectories of mental health between April 2020 and April 2021 and individual characteristics associated with these trajectory types. METHODS: King's College London Coronavirus Health and Experiences of Colleagues at King's is an occupational cohort study at a large university in London, UK. Participants (n=2241) completed online questionnaires fortnightly between April 2020 and April 2021. Symptoms of anxiety and depression were assessed using Generalised Anxiety Disorder (GAD-7) and Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9). RESULTS: On average, participants reported low levels of anxiety and depression (GAD-7 and PHQ-9 scores of 0-9, consistent with 'none', 'minimal' or 'mild' symptoms) throughout the year, with symptoms highest in April 2020 and decreasing over the summer months when no lockdown measures were in place. However, we observed more severe and variable symptoms among subgroups of participants. Four trajectory types for anxiety and depression were identified: 'persistent high severity' (6%-7% of participants), 'varying symptoms, opposing national cases' (4%-8%), 'varying symptoms, consistent with national cases' (6%-11%) and 'persistent low severity' (74%-84%). Younger age, female gender, caring responsibilities and shielding were associated with higher severity trajectory types. CONCLUSIONS: These data highlight differing individual responses to the pandemic and underscore the need to consider individual circumstances when assessing and treating mental health. Aggregate trends in anxiety and depression may hide greater variation and symptom severity among subgroups.

Exploring the Effects of In-App Components on Engagement With a Symptom-Tracking Platform Among Participants With Major Depressive Disorder (RADAR-Engage): Protocol for a 2-Armed Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Multi-parametric remote measurement technologies (RMTs) comprise smartphone apps and wearable devices for both active and passive symptom tracking. They hold potential for understanding current depression status and predicting future depression status. However, the promise of using RMTs for relapse prediction is heavily dependent on user engagement, which is defined as both a behavioral and experiential construct. A better understanding of how to promote engagement in RMT research through various in-app components will aid in providing scalable solutions for future remote research, higher quality results, and applications for implementation in clinical practice. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to provide the rationale and protocol for a 2-armed randomized controlled trial to investigate the effect of insightful notifications, progress visualization, and researcher contact details on behavioral and experiential engagement with a multi-parametric mobile health data collection platform, Remote Assessment of Disease and Relapse (RADAR)-base. METHODS: We aim to recruit 140 participants upon completion of their participation in the RADAR Major Depressive Disorder study in the London site. Data will be collected using 3 weekly tasks through an active smartphone app, a passive (background) data collection app, and a Fitbit device. Participants will be randomly allocated at a 1:1 ratio to receive either an adapted version of the active app that incorporates insightful notifications, progress visualization, and access to researcher contact details or the active app as usual. Statistical tests will be used to assess the hypotheses that participants using the adapted app will complete a higher percentage of weekly tasks (behavioral engagement: primary outcome) and score higher on self-awareness measures (experiential engagement). RESULTS: Recruitment commenced in April 2021. Data collection was completed in September 2021. The results of this study will be communicated via publication in 2022. CONCLUSIONS: This study aims to understand how best to promote engagement with RMTs in depression research. The findings will help determine the most effective techniques for implementation in both future rounds of the RADAR Major Depressive Disorder study and, in the long term, clinical practice. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04972474; http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04972474. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/32653.

Mental health among UK university staff and postgraduate students in the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic.

OBJECTIVES: To characterise the baseline King's College London Coronavirus Health and Experiences of Colleagues at King's cohort and describe patterns of probable depression and anxiety among staff and postgraduate research students at a large UK university in April/May 2020. METHODS: An online survey was sent to current staff and postgraduate research students via email in April 2020 (n=2590). Primary outcomes were probable depression and anxiety, measured with the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 and Generalised Anxiety Disorder-7, respectively. Secondary outcomes were alcohol use and perceived change in mental health. Outcomes were described using summary statistics and multivariable Poisson regression was used to explore associations with six groups of predictors: demographics and prior mental health, living arrangements, caring roles, healthcare, occupational factors and COVID-19 infection. All analyses were weighted to account for differences between the sample and target population in terms of age, gender, and ethnicity. RESULTS: Around 20% of staff members and 30% of postgraduate research students met thresholds for probable depression or anxiety on the questionnaires. This doubled to around 40% among younger respondents aged <25. Other factors associated with probable depression and anxiety included female gender, belonging to an ethnic minority group, caregiving responsibilities and shielding or isolating. Around 20% of participants were found to reach cut-off for hazardous drinking on Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test, while 30% were drinking more than before the pandemic. CONCLUSIONS: Our study shows worrying levels of symptoms of depression, anxiety and alcohol use disorder in an occupational sample from a large UK university in the months following the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Fitbeat: COVID-19 estimation based on wristband heart rate using a contrastive convolutional auto-encoder.

This study proposes a contrastive convolutional auto-encoder (contrastive CAE), a combined architecture of an auto-encoder and contrastive loss, to identify individuals with suspected COVID-19 infection using heart-rate data from participants with multiple sclerosis (MS) in the ongoing RADAR-CNS mHealth research project. Heart-rate data was remotely collected using a Fitbit wristband. COVID-19 infection was either confirmed through a positive swab test, or inferred through a self-reported set of recognised symptoms of the virus. The contrastive CAE outperforms a conventional convolutional neural network (CNN), a long short-term memory (LSTM) model, and a convolutional auto-encoder without contrastive loss (CAE). On a test set of 19 participants with MS with reported symptoms of COVID-19, each one paired with a participant with MS with no COVID-19 symptoms, the contrastive CAE achieves an unweighted average recall of 95.3 % , a sensitivity of 100 % and a specificity of 90.6 % , an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC-ROC) of 0.944, indicating a maximum successful detection of symptoms in the given heart rate measurement period, whilst at the same time keeping a low false alarm rate.

All-cause and cause-specific mortality in people with mental disorders and intellectual disabilities, before and during the COVID-19 pandemic: cohort study.

BACKGROUND: People with mental disorders and intellectual disabilities experience excess mortality compared with the general population. The impact of COVID-19 on exacerbating this, and in widening ethnic inequalities, is unclear. METHODS: Prospective data (N=167,122) from a large mental healthcare provider in London, UK, with deaths from 2019 to 2020, used to assess age- and gender-standardised mortality ratios (SMRs) across nine psychiatric conditions (schizophrenia-spectrum disorders, affective disorders, somatoform/ neurotic disorders, personality disorders, learning disabilities, eating disorders, substance use disorders, pervasive developmental disorders, dementia) and by ethnicity. FINDINGS: Prior to the World Health Organization (WHO) declaring COVID-19 a public health emergency on 30th January 2020, all-cause SMRs across all psychiatric cohorts were more than double the general population. By the second quarter of 2020, when the UK experienced substantial peaks in COVID-19 deaths, all-cause SMRs increased further, with COVID-19 SMRs elevated across all conditions (notably: learning disabilities: SMR: 9.24 (95% CI: 5.98-13.64), pervasive developmental disorders: 5.01 (95% CI: 2.40-9.20), eating disorders: 4.81 (95% CI: 1.56-11.22), schizophrenia-spectrum disorders: 3.26 (95% CI: 2.55-4.10), dementia: 3.82 (95% CI: 3.42, 4.25) personality disorders 4.58 (95% CI: 3.09-6.53)). Deaths from other causes remained at least double the population average over the whole year. Increased SMRs were similar across ethnic groups. INTERPRETATION: People with mental disorders and intellectual disabilities were at a greater risk of deaths relative to the general population before, during and after the first peak of COVID-19 deaths, with similar risks by ethnicity. Mortality from non-COVID-19/ other causes was elevated before/ during the pandemic, with higher COVID-19 mortality during the pandemic. FUNDING: ESRC (JD, CM), NIHR (JD, RS, MH), Health Foundation (JD), GSK, Janssen, Takeda (RS).