Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 27
Filter
1.
Solmi, Marco, Thompson, Trevor, Estradé, Andrés, Agorastos, Agorastos, Radua, Joaquim, Cortese, Samuele, Dragioti, Elena, Leisch, Friedrich, Vancampfort, Davy, Thygesen, Lau Caspar, Aschauer, Harald, Schloegelhofer, Monika, Aschauer, Elena, Schneeberger, Andres, Huber, Christian G.; Hasler, Gregor, Conus, Philippe, Do Cuénod, Kim Q.; von Känel, Roland, Arrondo, Gonzalo, Fusar-Poli, Paolo, Gorwood, Philip, Llorca, Pierre-Michel, Krebs, Marie-Odile, Scanferla, Elisabetta, Kishimoto, Taishiro, Rabbani, Golam, Skonieczna-Żydecka, Karolina, Brambilla, Paolo, Favaro, Angela, Takamiya, Akihiro, Zoccante, Leonardo, Colizzi, Marco, Bourgin, Julie, Kamiński, Karol, Moghadasin, Maryam, Seedat, Soraya, Matthews, Evan, Wells, John, Vassilopoulou, Emilia, Gadelha, Ary, Su, Kuan-Pin, Kwon, Jun Soo, Kim, Minah, Lee, Tae Young, Papsuev, Oleg, Manková, Denisa, Boscutti, Andrea, Gerunda, Cristiano, Saccon, Diego, Righi, Elena, Monaco, Francesco, Croatto, Giovanni, Cereda, Guido, Demurtas, Jacopo, Brondino, Natascia, Veronese, Nicola, Enrico, Paolo, Politi, Pierluigi, Ciappolino, Valentina, Pfennig, Andrea, Bechdolf, Andreas, Meyer-Lindenberg, Andreas, Kahl, Kai G.; Domschke, Katharina, Bauer, Michael, Koutsouleris, Nikolaos, Winter, Sibylle, Borgwardt, Stefan, Bitter, Istvan, Balazs, Judit, Czobor, Pal, Unoka, Zsolt, Mavridis, Dimitris, Tsamakis, Konstantinos, Bozikas, Vasilios P.; Tunvirachaisakul, Chavit, Maes, Michael, Rungnirundorn, Teerayuth, Supasitthumrong, Thitiporn, Haque, Ariful, Brunoni, Andre R.; Costardi, Carlos Gustavo, Schuch, Felipe Barreto, Polanczyk, Guilherme, Luiz, Jhoanne Merlyn, Fonseca, Lais, Aparicio, Luana V.; Valvassori, Samira S.; Nordentoft, Merete, Vendsborg, Per, Hoffmann, Sofie Have, Sehli, Jihed, Sartorius, Norman, Heuss, Sabina, Guinart, Daniel, Hamilton, Jane, Kane, John, Rubio, Jose, Sand, Michael, Koyanagi, Ai, Solanes, Aleix, Andreu-Bernabeu, Alvaro, Cáceres, Antonia San José, Arango, Celso, Díaz-Caneja, Covadonga M.; Hidalgo-Mazzei, Diego, Vieta, Eduard, Gonzalez-Peñas, Javier, Fortea, Lydia, Parellada, Mara, Fullana, Miquel A.; Verdolini, Norma, Andrlíková, Eva, Janků, Karolina, Millan, Mark John, Honciuc, Mihaela, Moniuszko-Malinowska, Anna, Łoniewski, Igor, Samochowiec, Jerzy, Kiszkiel, Łukasz, Marlicz, Maria, Sowa, Paweł, Marlicz, Wojciech, Spies, Georgina, Stubbs, Brendon, Firth, Joseph, Sullivan, Sarah, Darcin, Asli Enez, Aksu, Hatice, Dilbaz, Nesrin, Noyan, Onur, Kitazawa, Momoko, Kurokawa, Shunya, Tazawa, Yuki, Anselmi, Alejandro, Cracco, Cecilia, Machado, Ana Inés, Estrade, Natalia, De Leo, Diego, Curtis, Jackie, Berk, Michael, Ward, Philip, Teasdale, Scott, Rosenbaum, Simon, Marx, Wolfgang, Horodnic, Adrian Vasile, Oprea, Liviu, Alexinschi, Ovidiu, Ifteni, Petru, Turliuc, Serban, Ciuhodaru, Tudor, Bolos, Alexandra, Matei, Valentin, Nieman, Dorien H.; Sommer, Iris, van Os, Jim, van Amelsvoort, Therese, Sun, Ching-Fang, Guu, Ta-wei, Jiao, Can, Zhang, Jieting, Fan, Jialin, Zou, Liye, Yu, Xin, Chi, Xinli, de Timary, Philippe, van Winkel, Ruud, Ng, Bernardo, Pena, Edilberto, Arellano, Ramon, Roman, Raquel, Sanchez, Thelma, Movina, Larisa, Morgado, Pedro, Brissos, Sofia, Aizberg, Oleg, Mosina, Anna, Krinitski, Damir, Mugisha, James, Sadeghi-Bahmani, Dena, Sheybani, Farshad, Sadeghi, Masoud, Hadi, Samira, Brand, Serge, Errazuriz, Antonia, Crossley, Nicolas, Ristic, Dragana Ignjatovic, López-Jaramillo, Carlos, Efthymiou, Dimitris, Kuttichira, Praveenlal, Kallivayalil, Roy Abraham, Javed, Afzal, Afridi, Muhammad Iqbal, James, Bawo, Seb-Akahomen, Omonefe Joy, Fiedorowicz, Jess, Carvalho, Andre F.; Daskalakis, Jeff, Yatham, Lakshmi N.; Yang, Lin, Okasha, Tarek, Dahdouh, Aïcha, Gerdle, Björn, Tiihonen, Jari, Shin, Jae Il, Lee, Jinhee, Mhalla, Ahmed, Gaha, Lotfi, Brahim, Takoua, Altynbekov, Kuanysh, Negay, Nikolay, Nurmagambetova, Saltanat, Jamei, Yasser Abu, Weiser, Mark, Correll, Christoph U..
Journal of Affective Disorders ; 2022.
Article in English | ScienceDirect | ID: covidwho-2165443

ABSTRACT

Background The Collaborative Outcome study on Health and Functioning during Infection Times (COH-FIT;www.coh-fit.com) is an anonymous and global online survey measuring health and functioning during COVID-19 pandemic. The aim of this study was to test concurrently the validity of COH-FIT items and the internal validity of the co-primary outcome, a composite psychopathology "P-score”. Methods The COH-FIT survey has been translated into 30 languages (two blind forward-translations, consensus, one independent English back-translation, final harmonization). To measure mental health, 1–4 items ("COH-FIT items”) were extracted from validated questionnaires (e.g. Patient Health Questionnaire 9). COH-FIT items measured anxiety, depressive, post-traumatic, obsessive-compulsive, bipolar and psychotic symptoms, as well as stress, sleep and concentration. COH-FIT Items which correlated r ≥ 0.5 with validated companion questionnaires, were initially retained. A P-score factor structure was then identified from these items using exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and confirmatory factor analyses (CFA) on data split into training and validation sets. Consistency of results across languages, gender and age was assessed. Results From >150,000 adult responses by May 6th, 2022, a subset of 22,456 completed both COH-FIT items and validated questionnaires. Concurrent validity was consistently demonstrated across different languages for COH-FIT items. CFA confirmed EFA results of five first-order factors (anxiety, depression, post-traumatic, psychotic, psychophysiologic symptoms) and revealed a single second-order factor P-score, with high internal reliability (ω = 0.95). Factor structure was consistent across age and sex. Conclusions COH-FIT is a valid instrument to globally measure mental health during infection times. The P-score is a valid measure of multidimensional mental health.

2.
Front Public Health ; 10: 943435, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2154840

ABSTRACT

The sheer volume of research publications on physical activity, mental health, and wellbeing is overwhelming. The aim of this study was to perform a broad-ranging scientometric analysis to evaluate key themes and trends over the past decades, informing future lines of research. We searched the Web of Science Core Collection from inception until December 7, 2021, using the appropriate search terms such as "physical activity" or "mental health," with no limitation of language or time. Eligible studies were articles, reviews, editorial material, and proceeding papers. We retrieved 55,353 documents published between 1905 and 2021. The annual scientific production is exponential with a mean annual growth rate of 6.8% since 1989. The 1988-2021 co-cited reference network identified 50 distinct clusters that presented significant modularity and silhouette scores indicating highly credible clusters (Q = 0.848, S = 0.939). This network identified 6 major research trends on physical activity, namely cardiovascular diseases, somatic disorders, cognitive decline/dementia, mental illness, athletes' performance, related health issues, and eating disorders, and the COVID-19 pandemic. A focus on the latest research trends found that greenness/urbanicity (2014), concussion/chronic traumatic encephalopathy (2015), and COVID-19 (2019) were the most active clusters of research. The USA research network was the most central, and the Chinese research network, although important in size, was relatively isolated. Our results strengthen and expand the central role of physical activity in public health, calling for the systematic involvement of physical activity professionals as stakeholders in public health decision-making process.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Mental Health , COVID-19/epidemiology , Humans , Pandemics , Publications
3.
Mol Psychiatry ; 2022 Oct 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2062186

ABSTRACT

It remains unknown to what degree resource prioritization toward SARS-CoV-2 (2019-nCoV) coronavirus (COVID-19) cases had disrupted usual acute care for non-COVID-19 patients, especially in the most vulnerable populations such as patients with schizophrenia. The objective was to establish whether the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on non-COVID-19 hospital mortality and access to hospital care differed between patients with schizophrenia versus without severe mental disorder. We conducted a nationwide population-based cohort study of all non-COVID-19 acute hospitalizations in the pre-COVID-19 (March 1, 2019 through December 31, 2019) and COVID-19 (March 1, 2020 through December 31, 2020) periods in France. We divided the population into patients with schizophrenia and age/sex-matched patients without severe mental disorder (1:10). Using a difference-in-differences approach, we performed multivariate patient-level logistic regression models (adjusted odds ratio, aOR) with adjustment for complementary health insurance, smoking, alcohol and substance addiction, Charlson comorbidity score, origin of the patient, category of care, intensive care unit (ICU) care, major diagnosis groups and hospital characteristics. A total of 198,186 patients with schizophrenia were matched with 1,981,860 controls. The 90-day hospital mortality in patients with schizophrenia increased significantly more versus controls (aOR = 1.18; p < 0.001). This increased mortality was found for poisoning and injury (aOR = 1.26; p = 0.033), respiratory diseases (aOR = 1.19; p = 0.008) and for both surgery (aOR = 1.26; p = 0.008) and medical care settings (aOR = 1.16; p = 0.001). Significant changes in the case mix were noted with reduced admission in the ICU and for several somatic diseases including cancer, circulatory and digestive diseases and stroke for patients with schizophrenia compared to controls. These results suggest a greater deterioration in access to, effectiveness and safety of non-COVID-19 acute care in patients with schizophrenia compared to patients without severe mental disorders. These findings question hospitals' resilience pertaining to patient safety and underline the importance of developing specific strategies for vulnerable patients in anticipation of future public health emergencies.

4.
Schizophr Bull ; 2022 Aug 27.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2018096

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND AND HYPOTHESIS: Previous studies show that people with severe mental illness (SMI) are at higher risk of COVID-19 mortality, however limited evidence exists regarding risk postvaccination. We investigated COVID-19 mortality among people with schizophrenia and other SMIs before, during and after the UK vaccine roll-out. STUDY DESIGN: Using the Greater Manchester (GM) Care Record to access routinely collected health data linked with death records, we plotted COVID-19 mortality rates over time in GM residents with schizophrenia/psychosis, bipolar disorder (BD), and/or recurrent major depressive disorder (MDD) from February 2020 to September 2021. Multivariable logistic regression was used to compare mortality risk (risk ratios; RRs) between people with SMI (N = 193 435) and age-sex matched controls (N = 773 734), adjusted for sociodemographic factors, preexisting comorbidities, and vaccination status. STUDY RESULTS: Mortality risks were significantly higher among people with SMI compared with matched controls, particularly among people with schizophrenia/psychosis (RR 3.18, CI 2.94-3.44) and/or BD (RR 2.69, CI 2.16-3.34). In adjusted models, the relative risk of COVID-19 mortality decreased, though remained significantly higher than matched controls for people with schizophrenia (RR 1.61, CI 1.45-1.79) and BD (RR 1.92, CI 1.47-2.50), but not recurrent MDD (RR 1.08, CI 0.99-1.17). People with SMI continued to show higher mortality rate ratios relative to controls throughout 2021, during vaccination roll-out. CONCLUSIONS: People with SMI, notably schizophrenia and BD, were at greater risk of COVID-19 mortality compared to matched controls. Despite population vaccination efforts that have prioritized people with SMI, disparities still remain in COVID-19 mortality for people with SMI.

5.
Frontiers in public health ; 10, 2022.
Article in English | EuropePMC | ID: covidwho-1999363

ABSTRACT

The sheer volume of research publications on physical activity, mental health, and wellbeing is overwhelming. The aim of this study was to perform a broad-ranging scientometric analysis to evaluate key themes and trends over the past decades, informing future lines of research. We searched the Web of Science Core Collection from inception until December 7, 2021, using the appropriate search terms such as “physical activity” or “mental health,” with no limitation of language or time. Eligible studies were articles, reviews, editorial material, and proceeding papers. We retrieved 55,353 documents published between 1905 and 2021. The annual scientific production is exponential with a mean annual growth rate of 6.8% since 1989. The 1988–2021 co-cited reference network identified 50 distinct clusters that presented significant modularity and silhouette scores indicating highly credible clusters (Q = 0.848, S = 0.939). This network identified 6 major research trends on physical activity, namely cardiovascular diseases, somatic disorders, cognitive decline/dementia, mental illness, athletes' performance, related health issues, and eating disorders, and the COVID-19 pandemic. A focus on the latest research trends found that greenness/urbanicity (2014), concussion/chronic traumatic encephalopathy (2015), and COVID-19 (2019) were the most active clusters of research. The USA research network was the most central, and the Chinese research network, although important in size, was relatively isolated. Our results strengthen and expand the central role of physical activity in public health, calling for the systematic involvement of physical activity professionals as stakeholders in public health decision-making process.

6.
Neurosci Biobehav Rev ; 140: 104769, 2022 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1914858

ABSTRACT

We performed a scientometric analysis of the scientific literature on ADHD to evaluate key themes and trends over the past decades, informing future lines of research. We conducted a systematic search in Web of Science Core Collection up to 15 November, 2021 for scientific publications on ADHD. We retrieved 28,381 publications. We identified four major research trends: 1) ADHD treatment, risks factors and evidence synthesis; 2) neurophysiology, neuropsychology and neuroimaging; 3) genetics; 4) comorbidity. In chronological order, identified clusters of themes included: tricyclic antidepressants, ADHD diagnosis/treatment, bipolar disorder, EEG, polymorphisms, sleep, executive functions, pharmacology, genetics, environmental risk factors, emotional dysregulation, neuroimaging, non-pharmacological interventions, default mode network, Tourette, polygenic risk score, sluggish cognitive tempo, evidence-synthesis, toxins/chemicals, psychoneuroimmunology, Covid-19, and physical exercise. In conclusion, research on ADHD over the past decades has been driven mainly by a medical model. Whereas the neurobiological correlates of ADHD are undeniable and crucial, we look forward to further research on relevant psychosocial aspects related to ADHD, such as societal pressure, the concept of neurodiversity, and stigma.


Subject(s)
Attention Deficit Disorder with Hyperactivity , COVID-19 , Comorbidity , Executive Function , Humans , Neuroimaging
7.
J Child Psychol Psychiatry ; 63(12): 1671-1673, 2022 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1794648

ABSTRACT

In this Editorial Perspective, we take a systematic look at the overall nature of the Covid-19 related research on mental health in children and young people, to gain insight into the major trends in this area of research and inform future lines of investigation, clinical practices, and policies. By means of state-of-the-art scientometric approaches, we identified 3,692 relevant research outputs, mainly clustering around the following themes: (a) mental health consequences of the Covid-19 pandemic in children and young people; (b) impact of the pandemic on pre-existing psychiatric disorders; (c) family outcomes (i.e., family violence and parental mental health); and (d) link between physical and mental conditions. Only 23% of the retrieved publications reported new data, the remaining ones being reviews, editorials, opinion papers, and other nonempirical reports. The majority of the empirical studies used a cross-sectional design. We suggest that future research efforts should prioritise: (a) longitudinal follow-up of existing cohorts; (b) quasi-experimental studies to gain insight into causal mechanisms underlying pandemic-related psychopathology in children and young people; (c) pragmatic randomised controlled trials (RCTs) to test evidence-based intervention strategies; and (d) evidence-based guidelines for clinicians and policymakers.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Mental Health , Child , Humans , Adolescent , Pandemics , Cross-Sectional Studies
8.
J Med Virol ; 94(5): 1935-1949, 2022 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1777575

ABSTRACT

The COVID-19 pandemic and related restrictions can impact mental health. To quantify the mental health burden of COVID-19 pandemic, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis, searching World Health Organization COVID-19/PsycInfo/PubMed databases (09/29/2020), including observational studies reporting on mental health outcomes in any population affected by COVID-19. Primary outcomes were the prevalence of anxiety, depression, stress, sleep problems, posttraumatic symptoms. Sensitivity analyses were conducted on severe mental health problems, in high-quality studies, and in representative samples. Subgroup analyses were conducted stratified by age, sex, country income level, and COVID-19 infection status. One-hundred-seventy-three studies from February to July 2020 were included (n = 502,261, median sample = 948, age = 34.4 years, females = 63%). Ninety-one percent were cross-sectional studies, and 18.5%/57.2% were of high/moderate quality. The highest prevalence emerged for posttraumatic symptoms in COVID-19 infected people (94%), followed by behavioral problems in those with prior mental disorders (77%), fear in healthcare workers (71%), anxiety in caregivers/family members of people with COVID-19 (42%), general health/social contact/passive coping style in the general population (38%), depression in those with prior somatic disorders (37%), and fear in other-than-healthcare workers (29%). Females and people with COVID-19 infection had higher rates of almost all outcomes; college students/young adults of anxiety, depression, sleep problems, suicidal ideation; adults of fear and posttraumatic symptoms. Anxiety, depression, and posttraumatic symptoms were more prevalent in low-/middle-income countries, sleep problems in high-income countries. The COVID-19 pandemic adversely impacts mental health in a unique manner across population subgroups. Our results inform tailored preventive strategies and interventions to mitigate current, future, and transgenerational adverse mental health of the COVID-19 pandemic.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pandemics , Adult , COVID-19/epidemiology , Depression/epidemiology , Female , Humans , Mental Health , Prevalence , SARS-CoV-2 , Young Adult
9.
J Med Virol ; 94(6): 2402-2413, 2022 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1718416

ABSTRACT

The aim of this study is to provide a more accurate representation of COVID-19's case fatality rate (CFR) by performing meta-analyses by continents and income, and by comparing the result with pooled estimates. We used multiple worldwide data sources on COVID-19 for every country reporting COVID-19 cases. On the basis of data, we performed random and fixed meta-analyses for CFR of COVID-19 by continents and income according to each individual calendar date. CFR was estimated based on the different geographical regions and levels of income using three models: pooled estimates, fixed- and random-model. In Asia, all three types of CFR initially remained approximately between 2.0% and 3.0%. In the case of pooled estimates and the fixed model results, CFR increased to 4.0%, by then gradually decreasing, while in the case of random-model, CFR remained under 2.0%. Similarly, in Europe, initially, the two types of CFR peaked at 9.0% and 10.0%, respectively. The random-model results showed an increase near 5.0%. In high-income countries, pooled estimates and fixed-model showed gradually increasing trends with a final pooled estimates and random-model reached about 8.0% and 4.0%, respectively. In middle-income, the pooled estimates and fixed-model have gradually increased reaching up to 4.5%. in low-income countries, CFRs remained similar between 1.5% and 3.0%. Our study emphasizes that COVID-19 CFR is not a fixed or static value. Rather, it is a dynamic estimate that changes with time, population, socioeconomic factors, and the mitigatory efforts of individual countries.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Asia , COVID-19/epidemiology , Europe/epidemiology , Humans , SARS-CoV-2 , Socioeconomic Factors
10.
Rev Med Virol ; 32(5): e2336, 2022 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1712178

ABSTRACT

The aim of this systematic review and network meta-analysis is to evaluate the comparative effectiveness of N95, surgical/medical and non-medical facemasks as personal protective equipment against respiratory virus infection. The study incorporated 35 published and unpublished randomized controlled trials and observational studies investigating specific mask effectiveness against influenza virus, SARS-CoV, MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV-2. We searched PubMed, Google Scholar and medRxiv databases for studies published up to 5 February 2021 (PROSPERO registration: CRD42020214729). The primary outcome of interest was the rate of respiratory viral infection. The quality of evidence was estimated using the GRADE approach. High compliance to mask-wearing conferred a significantly better protection (odds ratio [OR], 0.43; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.23-0.82) than low compliance. N95 or equivalent masks were the most effective in providing protection against coronavirus infections (OR, 0.30; CI, 0.20-0.44) consistently across subgroup analyses of causative viruses and clinical settings. Evidence supporting the use of medical or surgical masks against influenza or coronavirus infections (SARS, MERS and COVID-19) was weak. Our study confirmed that the use of facemasks provides protection against respiratory viral infections in general; however, the effectiveness may vary according to the type of facemask used. Our findings encourage the use of N95 respirators or their equivalents (e.g., P2) for best personal protection in healthcare settings until more evidence on surgical and medical masks is accrued. This study highlights a substantial lack of evidence on the comparative effectiveness of mask types in community settings.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Respiratory Tract Infections , COVID-19/prevention & control , Humans , Masks , Network Meta-Analysis , Respiratory Tract Infections/prevention & control , SARS-CoV-2
11.
Int J Environ Res Public Health ; 19(3)2022 02 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1667166

ABSTRACT

The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 disease (SARS-CoV-2) is the most severe manifestation of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Accruing evidence indicates that the COVID-19 pandemic may have profound deleterious neurological, psychiatric, and psychological outcomes. The number of systematic reviews (SRs) and meta-analyses (MAs) on this topic has grown exponentially. This protocol aims to synthesize all evidence from SRs and MAs on the associations between the COVID-19 pandemic and neuropsychiatric outcomes. The following electronic databases will be systematically searched from inception up to 15 January 2022: PubMed, Embase, APA PsycINFO, and Cochrane Reviews. An umbrella review (UR) of SRs and MAs of observational studies will be conducted. SRs and/or MAs of observational studies examining any direct or indirect association of COVID-19 with the neuropsychiatric outcomes will be deemed eligible for potential inclusion in this UR. The direct associations include the impact on the (1) prognosis of COVID-19 and (2) neuropsychiatric sequelae after COVID-19 infection. The indirect associations include the influence of the COVID-19 pandemic on the (1) treatments and (2) outcomes of neurological and psychiatric conditions associated with the COVID-19 pandemic.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Mental Disorders , Humans , Mental Disorders/epidemiology , Observational Studies as Topic , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2 , Systematic Reviews as Topic
13.
J Affect Disord ; 299: 367-376, 2022 02 15.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1598263

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has altered daily routines and family functioning, led to closing schools, and dramatically limited social interactions worldwide. Measuring its impact on mental health of vulnerable children and adolescents is crucial. METHODS: The Collaborative Outcomes study on Health and Functioning during Infection Times (COH-FIT - www.coh-fit.com) is an on-line anonymous survey, available in 30 languages, involving >230 investigators from 49 countries supported by national/international professional associations. COH-FIT has thee waves (until the pandemic is declared over by the WHO, and 6-18 months plus 24-36 months after its end). In addition to adults, COH-FIT also includes adolescents (age 14-17 years), and children (age 6-13 years), recruited via non-probability/snowball and representative sampling and assessed via self-rating and parental rating. Non-modifiable/modifiable risk factors/treatment targets to inform prevention/intervention programs to promote health and prevent mental and physical illness in children and adolescents will be generated by COH-FIT. Co-primary outcomes are changes in well-being (WHO-5) and a composite psychopathology P-Score. Multiple behavioral, family, coping strategy and service utilization factors are also assessed, including functioning and quality of life. RESULTS: Up to June 2021, over 13,000 children and adolescents from 59 countries have participated in the COH-FIT project, with representative samples from eleven countries. LIMITATIONS: Cross-sectional and anonymous design. CONCLUSIONS: Evidence generated by COH-FIT will provide an international estimate of the COVID-19 effect on children's, adolescents' and families', mental and physical health, well-being, functioning and quality of life, informing the formulation of present and future evidence-based interventions and policies to minimize adverse effects of the present and future pandemics on youth.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Adolescent , Adult , Child , Cross-Sectional Studies , Health Promotion , Humans , Mental Health , Pandemics , Quality of Life , SARS-CoV-2
14.
Biomed Environ Sci ; 34(11): 871-880, 2021 Nov 20.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1580280

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: Previous studies have shown that meteorological factors may increase COVID-19 mortality, likely due to the increased transmission of the virus. However, this could also be related to an increased infection fatality rate (IFR). We investigated the association between meteorological factors (temperature, humidity, solar irradiance, pressure, wind, precipitation, cloud coverage) and IFR across Spanish provinces ( n = 52) during the first wave of the pandemic (weeks 10-16 of 2020). METHODS: We estimated IFR as excess deaths (the gap between observed and expected deaths, considering COVID-19-unrelated deaths prevented by lockdown measures) divided by the number of infections (SARS-CoV-2 seropositive individuals plus excess deaths) and conducted Spearman correlations between meteorological factors and IFR across the provinces. RESULTS: We estimated 2,418,250 infections and 43,237 deaths. The IFR was 0.03% in < 50-year-old, 0.22% in 50-59-year-old, 0.9% in 60-69-year-old, 3.3% in 70-79-year-old, 12.6% in 80-89-year-old, and 26.5% in ≥ 90-year-old. We did not find statistically significant relationships between meteorological factors and adjusted IFR. However, we found strong relationships between low temperature and unadjusted IFR, likely due to Spain's colder provinces' aging population. CONCLUSION: The association between meteorological factors and adjusted COVID-19 IFR is unclear. Neglecting age differences or ignoring COVID-19-unrelated deaths may severely bias COVID-19 epidemiological analyses.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Pandemics/statistics & numerical data , Weather , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19/virology , Humans , Meteorological Concepts , Middle Aged , SARS-CoV-2/physiology , Spain/epidemiology , Young Adult
15.
J Affect Disord ; 299: 393-407, 2022 02 15.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1587438

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: . High-quality comprehensive data on short-/long-term physical/mental health effects of the COVID-19 pandemic are needed. METHODS: . The Collaborative Outcomes study on Health and Functioning during Infection Times (COH-FIT) is an international, multi-language (n=30) project involving >230 investigators from 49 countries/territories/regions, endorsed by national/international professional associations. COH-FIT is a multi-wave, on-line anonymous, cross-sectional survey [wave 1: 04/2020 until the end of the pandemic, 12 months waves 2/3 starting 6/24 months threreafter] for adults, adolescents (14-17), and children (6-13), utilizing non-probability/snowball and representative sampling. COH-FIT aims to identify non-modifiable/modifiable risk factors/treatment targets to inform prevention/intervention programs to improve social/health outcomes in the general population/vulnerable subgrous during/after COVID-19. In adults, co-primary outcomes are change from pre-COVID-19 to intra-COVID-19 in well-being (WHO-5) and a composite psychopathology P-Score. Key secondary outcomes are a P-extended score, global mental and physical health. Secondary outcomes include health-service utilization/functioning, treatment adherence, functioning, symptoms/behaviors/emotions, substance use, violence, among others. RESULTS: . Starting 04/26/2020, up to 14/07/2021 >151,000 people from 155 countries/territories/regions and six continents have participated. Representative samples of ≥1,000 adults have been collected in 15 countries. Overall, 43.0% had prior physical disorders, 16.3% had prior mental disorders, 26.5% were health care workers, 8.2% were aged ≥65 years, 19.3% were exposed to someone infected with COVID-19, 76.1% had been in quarantine, and 2.1% had been COVID 19-positive. LIMITATIONS: . Cross-sectional survey, preponderance of non-representative participants. CONCLUSIONS: . Results from COH-FIT will comprehensively quantify the impact of COVID-19, seeking to identify high-risk groups in need for acute and long-term intervention, and inform evidence-based health policies/strategies during this/future pandemics.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pandemics , Adolescent , Adult , Anxiety , Child , Cross-Sectional Studies , Depression , Humans , Mental Health , Outcome Assessment, Health Care , SARS-CoV-2
16.
Mol Psychiatry ; 27(2): 1248-1255, 2022 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1555496

ABSTRACT

People with severe mental illness (SMI; including schizophrenia/psychosis, bipolar disorder (BD), major depressive disorder (MDD)) experience large disparities in physical health. Emerging evidence suggests this group experiences higher risks of infection and death from COVID-19, although the full extent of these disparities are not yet established. We investigated COVID-19 related infection, hospitalisation and mortality among people with SMI in the UK Biobank (UKB) cohort study. Overall, 447,296 participants from UKB (schizophrenia/psychosis = 1925, BD = 1483 and MDD = 41,448, non-SMI = 402,440) were linked with healthcare and death records. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to examine differences in COVID-19 outcomes by diagnosis, controlling for sociodemographic factors and comorbidities. In unadjusted analyses, higher odds of COVID-19 mortality were seen among people with schizophrenia/psychosis (odds ratio [OR] 4.84, 95% confidence interval [CI] 3.00-7.34), BD (OR 3.76, 95% CI 2.00-6.35), and MDD (OR 1.99, 95% CI 1.69-2.33) compared to people with no SMI. Higher odds of infection and hospitalisation were also seen across all SMI groups, particularly among people with schizophrenia/psychosis (OR 1.61, 95% CI 1.32-1.96; OR 3.47, 95% CI 2.47-4.72) and BD (OR 1.48, 95% CI 1.16-1.85; OR 3.31, 95% CI 2.22-4.73). In fully adjusted models, mortality and hospitalisation odds remained significantly higher among all SMI groups, though infection odds remained significantly higher only for MDD. People with schizophrenia/psychosis, BD and MDD have higher risks of COVID-19 infection, hospitalisation and mortality. Only a proportion of these disparities were accounted for by pre-existing demographic characteristics or comorbidities. Vaccination and preventive measures should be prioritised in these particularly vulnerable groups.


Subject(s)
Bipolar Disorder , COVID-19 , Depressive Disorder, Major , Schizophrenia , Biological Specimen Banks , Bipolar Disorder/epidemiology , Cohort Studies , Depressive Disorder, Major/epidemiology , Hospitalization , Humans , Schizophrenia/epidemiology , United Kingdom/epidemiology
17.
Clin Transl Sci ; 15(2): 501-513, 2022 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1494654

ABSTRACT

On October 2020, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved remdesivir as the first drug for the treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), increasing remdesivir prescriptions worldwide. However, potential cardiovascular (CV) toxicities associated with remdesivir remain unknown. We aimed to characterize the CV adverse drug reactions (ADRs) associated with remdesivir using VigiBase, an individual case safety report database of the World Health Organization (WHO). Disproportionality analyses of CV-ADRs associated with remdesivir were performed using reported odds ratios and information components. We conducted in vitro experiments using cardiomyocytes derived from human pluripotent stem cell cardiomyocytes (hPSC-CMs) to confirm cardiotoxicity of remdesivir. To distinguish drug-induced CV-ADRs from COVID-19 effects, we restricted analyses to patients with COVID-19 and found that, after adjusting for multiple confounders, cardiac arrest (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]: 1.88, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.08-3.29), bradycardia (aOR: 2.09, 95% CI: 1.24-3.53), and hypotension (aOR: 1.67, 95% CI: 1.03-2.73) were associated with remdesivir. In vitro data demonstrated that remdesivir reduced the cell viability of hPSC-CMs in time- and dose-dependent manners. Physicians should be aware of potential CV consequences following remdesivir use and implement adequate CV monitoring to maintain a tolerable safety margin.


Subject(s)
Adenosine Monophosphate/analogs & derivatives , Alanine/analogs & derivatives , Antiviral Agents/adverse effects , COVID-19/drug therapy , Cardiovascular Diseases/chemically induced , Pharmacovigilance , SARS-CoV-2 , Adenosine Monophosphate/adverse effects , Alanine/adverse effects , Databases, Factual , Humans , Myocytes, Cardiac/drug effects , Retrospective Studies , World Health Organization
18.
J Affect Disord ; 295: 740-751, 2021 12 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1385792

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 (coronavirus disease 2019)-related pandemic represents a global source of societal and health burden. Yet, the impact of the pandemic on people with severe mental illness, including bipolar disorder (BD), remains unclear, warranting scoping review on the matter. METHODS: The MEDLINE and EMBASE databases were systematically searched from inception up to April 24, 2021, adopting broad inclusion criteria to assess a variety of clinical and public health themes related to people with a primary diagnosis of BD during the COVID-19 pandemics. The present work complying with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR) registered in the Open Science Framework (OSF) repository (https://osf.io/7evpx/). RESULTS: Fourteen papers informed the present scoping review. Four major themes were identified: (i) impact of COVID-19-related stressors on BD; (ii) impact of COVID-19 on mental health service utilization among people with BD; (iii) impact of BD on the risk of acquiring SARS-CoV-2 infection; (iv) engagement in preventative behaviors among people with BD. Additional themes warranting further research were nonetheless detected. LIMITATIONS: Further original studies are needed. CONCLUSION: The present study confirmed the high-vulnerability hypothesis concerning people with BD versus the general population, reinforcing the need for further research related to the COVID-19 pandemic. Additional information is warranted to compare the impact of the pandemic period among BD people against pre-pandemic records, the general population, and other severe mental illnesses, namely people with schizophrenia or major depressive disorder, to inform the public health and the delivery of patient-tailored interventions.


Subject(s)
Bipolar Disorder , COVID-19 , Depressive Disorder, Major , Bipolar Disorder/epidemiology , Humans , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2
19.
J Child Psychol Psychiatry ; 63(1): 122-125, 2022 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1338816

ABSTRACT

This editorial perspective focuses on the challenges of research on child and adolescent mental health during the COVID-19 pandemic. Common limitations of published/ongoing studies are (i) being conducted in one or few countries, (ii) the survey being available in one or few languages, (iii) targeting selected samples (e.g., clinical populations and health workers) rather than the general population, (iv) only recruiting/reporting on non-representative samples, (v) focusing often on a restricted set of mental health outcomes, missing the broader picture of mental and physical health, quality of life and functioning, (vi) failing to use a longitudinal design and (vii) collecting only parental ratings or self-rated questionnaires from children and adolescents, but not both. We discuss how the Collaborative Outcomes Study on Health and Functioning during Infection Times (COH-FIT) was designed to address some of these challenges, also highlighting its limitations.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Adolescent , Child , Humans , Mental Health , Pandemics , Quality of Life , SARS-CoV-2
20.
Int J Environ Res Public Health ; 18(10)2021 May 14.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1234702

ABSTRACT

The worldwide prevalence of insufficient physical activity (PA) and prolonged sedentary behavior (SB) were high before the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic. Measures that were taken by governments (such as home confinement) to control the spread of COVID-19 may have affected levels of PA and SB. This cross-sectional study among South American adults during the first months of COVID-19 aims to (i) compare sitting time (ST), screen exposure, moderate PA (MPA), vigorous PA (VPA), and moderate-to-vigorous PA (MVPA) before and during lockdown to sociodemographic correlates and (ii) to assess the impact of lockdown on combinations of groups reporting meeting/not-meeting PA recommendations and engaging/not-engaging excessive ST (≥7 h/day). Bivariate associations, effect sizes, and multivariable linear regressions were used. Adults from Argentina (n = 575) and Chile (n = 730) completed an online survey with questions regarding demographics, lifestyle factors, and chronic diseases. Mean reductions of 42.7 and 22.0 min./day were shown in MPA and VPA, respectively; while increases of 212.4 and 164.3 min./day were observed in screen and ST, respectively. Those who met PA recommendations and spent <7 h/day of ST experienced greatest changes, reporting greater than 3 h/day higher ST and more than 1.5 h/day lower MVPA. Findings from the present study suggest that efforts to promote PA to South American adults during and after COVID-19 restrictions are needed.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Adult , Argentina , Chile , Communicable Disease Control , Cross-Sectional Studies , Exercise , Humans , SARS-CoV-2 , Sitting Position
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL