Design and field procedures for the clinical reappraisal of the Composite International Diagnostic Interview version 3.3 in Qatar's national mental health study.

BACKGROUND: The Composite International Diagnostic Interview (CIDI) has been clinically reappraised in several studies conducted mainly in the US and Europe. This report describes the methodology used to conduct one of the Middle East's largest clinical reappraisal studies. The study was carried out in conjunction with the World Mental Health Qatar-the first national psychiatric epidemiological study of common mental disorders in the country. This study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic consistency of core modules of the newly translated and adapted Arabic version of the CIDI 5.0 against the independent clinical diagnoses based on the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-5 (SCID-5). METHODS: Telephone follow-up interviews were administered by trained clinicians using the latest research edition of the SCID for DSM-5. Telephone administered interviews were key in the data collection, as the study took place during the COVID-19 pandemic. RESULTS: Overall, within 12 months, 485 interviews were completed. The response rate was 52%. Quality control monitoring documented excellent adherence of clinical interviews to the rating protocol. CONCLUSIONS: The overall methods used in this study proved to be efficient and effective. For future research, instrument cultural adaptation within the cultural context is highly recommended.

The World Mental Health International College Student Survey in Canada: Protocol for a Mental Health and Substance Use Trend Study.

BACKGROUND: The World Health Organization World Mental Health International College Student (WMH-ICS) initiative aims to screen for mental health and substance use problems among postsecondary students on a global scale as well as to develop and evaluate evidence-based preventive and ameliorative interventions for this population. This protocol paper presents the Canadian version of the WMH-ICS survey, detailing the adapted survey instrument, the unique weekly cross-sectional administration, the multitiered recruitment strategy, and the associated risk mitigation protocols. OBJECTIVE: This paper aims to provide a methodological resource for researchers conducting cross-national comparisons of WMH-ICS data, as well as to serve as a useful guide for those interested in replicating the outlined cross-sectional methodology to better understand how mental health and substance use vary over time among university students. METHODS: The online survey is based on the WMH-ICS survey instrument, modified to the Canadian context by the addition of questions pertaining to Canadian-based guidelines and the translation of the survey to Canadian French. The survey is administered through the Qualtrics survey platform and is sent to an independent stratified random sample of 350 students per site weekly, followed by two reminder emails. Upon survey closure every week, a random subsample of 70 nonresponders are followed up with via phone or through a personal email in an effort to decrease nonresponder bias. The survey is accompanied by an extensive risk mitigation protocol that stratifies respondents by the level of need and provides tailored service recommendations, including a facilitated expedited appointment to student counseling services for those at increased risk of suicide. The anticipated sample size is approximately 5500 students per site per year. RESULTS: In February 2020, the Canadian survey was deployed at the University of British Columbia. This was followed by deployment at Simon Fraser University (November 2020), McMaster University (January 2021), and the University of Toronto (January 2022). Data collection at all 4 sites is ongoing. As of May 6, 2022, 29,503 responses have been collected. CONCLUSIONS: Based on international collaboration, the Canadian version of the WMH-ICS survey incorporates a novel methodological approach centered on the weekly administration of a comprehensive cross-sectional survey to independent stratified random samples of university students. After 27 months of consecutive survey administration, we have developed and refined a survey protocol that has proven effective in engaging students at four Canadian institutions, allowing us to track how mental health and substance use vary over time using an internationally developed university student survey based on the criteria from the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (Fifth Edition). INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): RR1-10.2196/35168.

Study protocol for pragmatic trials of Internet-delivered guided and unguided cognitive behavior therapy for treating depression and anxiety in university students of two Latin American countries: the Yo Puedo Sentirme Bien study.

BACKGROUND: Major depressive disorder (MDD) and generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) are highly prevalent among university students and predict impaired college performance and later life role functioning. Yet most students do not receive treatment, especially in low-middle-income countries (LMICs). We aim to evaluate the effects of expanding treatment using scalable and inexpensive Internet-delivered transdiagnostic cognitive behavioral therapy (iCBT) among college students with symptoms of MDD and/or GAD in two LMICs in Latin America (Colombia and Mexico) and to investigate the feasibility of creating a precision treatment rule (PTR) to predict for whom iCBT is most effective. METHODS: We will first carry out a multi-site randomized pragmatic clinical trial (N = 1500) of students seeking treatment at student mental health clinics in participating universities or responding to an email offering services. Students on wait lists for clinic services will be randomized to unguided iCBT (33%), guided iCBT (33%), and treatment as usual (TAU) (33%). iCBT will be provided immediately whereas TAU will be whenever a clinic appointment is available. Short-term aggregate effects will be assessed at 90 days and longer-term effects 12 months after randomization. We will use ensemble machine learning to predict heterogeneity of treatment effects of unguided versus guided iCBT versus TAU and develop a precision treatment rule (PTR) to optimize individual student outcome. We will then conduct a second and third trial with separate samples (n = 500 per arm), but with unequal allocation across two arms: 25% will be assigned to the treatment determined to yield optimal outcomes based on the PTR developed in the first trial (PTR for optimal short-term outcomes for Trial 2 and 12-month outcomes for Trial 3), whereas the remaining 75% will be assigned with equal allocation across all three treatment arms. DISCUSSION: By collecting comprehensive baseline characteristics to evaluate heterogeneity of treatment effects, we will provide valuable and innovative information to optimize treatment effects and guide university mental health treatment planning. Such an effort could have enormous public-health implications for the region by increasing the reach of treatment, decreasing unmet need and clinic wait times, and serving as a model of evidence-based intervention planning and implementation. TRIAL STATUS: IRB Approval of Protocol Version 1.0; June 3, 2020. Recruitment began on March 1, 2021. Recruitment is tentatively scheduled to be completed on May 30, 2024. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04780542 . First submission date: February 28, 2021.

Estimated Prevalence of and Factors Associated With Clinically Significant Anxiety and Depression Among US Adults During the First Year of the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Importance: Claims of dramatic increases in clinically significant anxiety and depression early in the COVID-19 pandemic came from online surveys with extremely low or unreported response rates. Objective: To examine trend data in a calibrated screening for clinically significant anxiety and depression among adults in the only US government benchmark probability trend survey not disrupted by the COVID-19 pandemic. Design, Setting, and Participants: This survey study used the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS), a monthly state-based trend survey conducted over the telephone. Participants were adult respondents in the 50 US states and District of Columbia who were surveyed March to December 2020 compared with the same months in 2017 to 2019. Exposures: Monthly state COVID-19 death rates. Main Outcomes and Measures: Estimated 30-day prevalence of clinically significant anxiety and depression based on responses to a single BRFSS item calibrated to a score of 6 or greater on the 4-item Patient Health Questionnaire (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, 0.84). All percentages are weighted based on BRFSS calibration weights. Results: Overall, there were 1 429 354 respondents, with 1 093 663 in 2017 to 2019 (600 416 [51.1%] women; 87 153 [11.8%] non-Hispanic Black; 826 334 [61.5%] non-Hispanic White; 411 254 [27.8%] with college education; and 543 619 [56.8] employed) and 335 691 in 2020 (182 351 [51.3%] women; 25 517 [11.7%] non-Hispanic Black; 250 333 [60.5%] non-Hispanic White; 130 642 [29.3%] with college education; and 168 921 [54.9%] employed). Median within-state response rates were 45.9% to 49.4% in 2017 to 2019 and 47.9% in 2020. Estimated 30-day prevalence of clinically significant anxiety and depression was 0.4 (95% CI, 0.0 to 0.7) percentage points higher in March to December 2020 (12.4%) than March to December 2017 to 2019 (12.1%). This estimated increase was limited, however, to students (2.4 [95% CI, 0.8 to 3.9] percentage points) and the employed (0.9 [95% CI, 0.5 to 1.4] percentage points). Estimated prevalence decreased among the short-term unemployed (-1.8 [95% CI, -3.1 to -0.5] percentage points) and those unable to work (-4.2 [95% CI, -5.3 to -3.2] percentage points), but did not change significantly among the long-term unemployed (-2.1 [95% CI, -4.5 to 0.5] percentage points), homemakers (0.8 [95% CI, -0.3 to 1.9] percentage points), or the retired (0.1 [95% CI, -0.6 to 0.8] percentage points). The increase in anxiety and depression prevalence among employed people was positively associated with the state-month COVID-19 death rate (1.8 [95% CI, 1.2 to 2.5] percentage points when high and 0.0 [95% CI, -0.7 to 0.6] percentage points when low) and was elevated among women compared with men (2.0 [95% CI, 1.4 to 2.5] percentage points vs 0.2 [95% CI, -0.1 to 0.6] percentage points), Non-Hispanic White individuals compared with Hispanic and non-Hispanic Black individuals (1.3 [95% CI, 0.6 to 1.9] percentage points vs 1.1 [95% CI, -0.2 to 2.5] percentage points and 0.7 [95% CI, -0.1 to 1.5] percentage points), and those with college educations compared with less than high school educations (2.5 [95% CI, 1.9 to 3.1] percentage points vs -0.6 [95% CI, -2.7 to 1.4] percentage points). Conclusions and Relevance: In this survey study, clinically significant US adult anxiety and depression increased less during 2020 than suggested by online surveys. However, this modest aggregate increase could mask more substantial increases in key population segments (eg, first responders) and might have become larger in 2021 and 2022.

Changes in Prevalence of Mental Illness Among US Adults During Compared with Before the COVID-19 Pandemic.

The authors review trend and cohort surveys and administrative data comparing prevalence of mental disorders during, versus, and before the COVID-19 pandemic and changes in mental health disparities. Best evidence suggests clinically significant anxiety-depression point prevalence increased by relative-risk (RR) = 1.3 to 1.5 during the pandemic compared with before. This level of increase is much less than the implausibly high RR = 5.0 to 8.0 estimates reported in trend studies early in the pandemic based on less-appropriate comparisons. Changes in prevalence also occurred during the pandemic, but relative prevalence appears not to have changed substantially over this time.

Conducting a state-of-the-art mental health survey in a traditional setting: Challenges and lessons from piloting the World Mental Health Survey in Qatar.

OBJECTIVES: A small country in the Arabian Peninsula, Qatar experienced rapid economic growth in the last 3 decades accompanied by major socio-demographic shifts towards a younger and more highly educated population. To date, no national epidemiological study has examined the prevalence, associated factors, or sequelae of mental disorders in Qatar's general population. METHODS: The World Mental Health Qatar (WMHQ) is a national mental health needs assessment survey and is the first carried out in collaboration with the World Mental Health Survey initiative to assess the prevalence and burden of psychiatric illnesses among the full Arabic speaking population (nationals and non-nationals) within the same country. RESULTS: Standard translation and harmonization procedures were used to develop the WMHQ instrument. A survey quality control system with standard performance indicators was developed to ensure interviewer adherence to standard practices. A pilot study was then carried out just prior to the COVID-19 pandemic. Endorsement from public health authorities and sequential revision of the interview schedule led to full survey completion (as opposed to partial completion) and good overall response rate. CONCLUSIONS: The WMHQ survey will provide timely and actionable information based on quality enhancement procedures put in place during the development and piloting of the study.