Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 4 de 4
Filter
Add filters

Language
Document Type
Year range
1.
Int J Ment Health Addict ; : 1, 2020 Jul 21.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2239376

ABSTRACT

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1007/s11469-020-00343-8.].

2.
Int J Ment Health Addict ; 20(1): 83-91, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2228369

ABSTRACT

The COVID-19 pandemic is a global health emergency that could potentially have a serious impact on public health. Fear has been one of the most frequent psychological reaction in the population during the current pandemic. The aim of this study was to compare fear of COVID-19 between genders and to examine whether the differences between genders may be predictors of fear of COVID-19 scores. A cross-sectional web-based survey design was adopted. The sample comprised 772 Cuban participants. The Fear of COVID-19 Scale was used to explore fear reactions in the sample. An independent-samples t test was conducted to compare the fear of COVID-19 scores between genders, and multinomial logistic regression was modeling to identify variables independently associated with fear of coronavirus. In our sample, on average, female participants experienced significantly greater fear of COVID-19 than men. The gender of participants significantly predicted the level of fear of COVID-19. Being female was a predictor of medium and high levels of fear of COVID-19. The odds of a female with middle fear levels compared to low fear was 3.13 times more than for a male, and the odds of a female with high fear levels compared to low fear was 3.45 times more than for a male. Our results corroborate international research that indicate a greater psychological vulnerability in women during the COVID-19 pandemic. This result points to the need to design interventions that reduce the negative impact of the current outbreak on women's mental health.

4.
Int J Environ Res Public Health ; 18(14)2021 07 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1323226

ABSTRACT

The purpose of this communication is to provide an overview as well as the strengths and weaknesses of Overeaters Anonymous (OA) as an intervention for binge eating disorder treatment. Binge eating disorder is associated with low remission rates, high relapse rates, treatment dissatisfaction, and high rates of failure to receive treatment attributed to stigma, misconceptions, lack of diagnosis, access to care, and inadequate insurance coverage. New interventions are needed that can overcome these barriers. OA is a twelve-step program and established fellowship for individuals who self-identify as having problematic relationships with food or eating. OA can be referred clinically or sought out by an individual confidentially, without a diagnosis, and free of charge. OA's Nine Tools, Twelve Steps, and Twelve Traditions can provide structure, social support, and open, anonymous sharing that fosters a sense of connection and belonging. This may provide benefit to individuals who value structure and social support in their recovery. The tradition of anonymity may also create some challenges for conducting research and may explain the shortage of empirical support. This commentary reviews existing research findings on the effectiveness of twelve-step interventions and OA. Common misunderstandings about and within OA are also addressed and OA's limitations are discussed. Overall, OA provides a promising option for binge eating disorder treatment that warrants clinical research on its feasibility and efficacy in a way that respects and protects its tradition of anonymity.


Subject(s)
Binge-Eating Disorder , Binge-Eating Disorder/therapy , Emotions , Humans , Social Stigma , Social Support
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL