A content analysis of medication adherence material in patient educational resources about gout.

Objective: This study aimed to investigate how medication adherence is addressed in online gout resources in six countries. We investigated how often adherence was referred to, the strategies suggested to improve patient adherence, and the types of nonadherence that were targeted. We also examined the readability of the adherence material. Methods: A content analysis was conducted on 151 online gout resources from medical and health organisations in six predominantly English-speaking countries. Two reviewers coded the content of the websites into categories (kappa 0.80). The analysis involved coding the resources for reasons for nonadherence, and adherence-promoting strategies. Flesch-Kincaid Reading Ease scores and word count were also computed. Results: Out of 151 websites examined, 77 websites discussed medication adherence (51%), with intentional nonadherence being more prevalent than unintentional nonadherence. 67 websites targeted different types of nonadherence, including drug-specific concerns (50%), misconceptions of gout curability and the necessity of medication (16%), forgetfulness (16%), and other practical challenges (5%). Strategies to promote adherence were found in one-third of the websites, with medication education being the most prevalent strategy (17%), followed by healthcare provider engagement (13%) and memory aid strategies (6%). On average, about 11% of the words (89.27, SD = 76.35) in the entire document were focused on adherence. Difficult reading comprehension was found in one-fifth of adherence-related websites. Conclusion: Findings reveal limited medication adherence coverage and narrow strategies in online gout resources. Improved adherence portrayal is needed for effective gout management through comprehensive strategies and clear, understandable information.

Can side effect expectations be assessed implicitly? A comparison of explicit and implicit expectations of vaccination side effects.

OBJECTIVE: Treatment expectations alter the probability of experiencing unpleasant side effects from an intervention, including vaccinations. To date, expectations have mostly been assessed explicitly bearing the risk of bias. This study aims to compare implicit expectations of side effects from COVID-19 and flu vaccinations and to examine their relationships with vaccine attitudes and intentions. METHODS: N = 248 participants took part in a cross-sectional online survey assessing explicit and implicit expectations, as well as vaccine-related attitudes and personal characteristics. A Single Category Implicit Association Test (SC-IAT) was developed to assess implicit side effect expectations. Explicit side effect expectations were measured with the Treatment Expectation Questionnaire (TEX-Q). RESULTS: Whereas explicit and implicit expectations regarding COVID-19 vaccine were significantly correlated (r = -0.325, p < .001), those correlations could not be found regarding flu vaccine (r = -0.072, p = .32). Explicit measures (COVID-19: ß = -0.576, p < .001; flu: ß = -0.301, p < .001) predicted the intention to receive further vaccinations more than implicit measures (COVID-19: ß = -0.005, p = .93; flu: ß = 0.004, p = .96). Explicit measures (COVID-19: OR = 0.360, p < .001; flu: OR = 0.819, p = .03) predicted vaccination status, while implicit measures did not (COVID- 19: OR = 2.643, p = .35; flu: OR = 0.829, p = .61). CONCLUSION: Expectations to experience side effects from vaccinations can be measured implicitly, in addition to explicit measures. Further investigation needs to determine the relative contribution and additive value of using implicit measures to assess treatment expectations.

Can Smartphone Notifications Help With Gout Management? A Feasibility Study.

OBJECTIVE: This feasibility study aimed to assess the acceptability of using smartphone notifications to modify the medication beliefs of people with gout. We evaluated the feasibility and acceptability of a smartphone application using the Technology Acceptance Model. We explored adherence rate differences and outcomes between the intervention and control groups. METHODS: Fifty-two patients with gout who were prescribed allopurinol were randomly assigned to either active control (n = 24) or intervention group (n = 28). Over 3 months, both groups used the study app on their smartphones. The active control group received notifications about general health advice, whereas the intervention group received adherence-targeted notifications. The feasibility and acceptability of the smartphone app was measured through semistructured interviews. Adherence rate was assessed through serum urate levels and missed doses at 3 timepoints: baseline, 3 months (post intervention), and 6 months (follow-up). RESULTS: The smartphone app demonstrated high feasibility, with strong participant retention and compliance. The participants expressed high levels of satisfaction with the app's user-friendliness and content, highlighting its acceptability. Both groups showed a significant reduction in missed doses over time (P < 0.05), but no significant differences in serum urate levels were found between the groups. Patients who received adherence-targeted notifications reported finding it more convenient to take allopurinol and expressed higher overall treatment satisfaction throughout the study. CONCLUSION: Adherence-targeted notifications have the potential to be an effective and scalable approach to supporting medication adherence in patients with gout. Further research is needed with larger samples to refine the components of the intervention and explore its optimal implementation.

Which fatigue scale should I use? A Rasch analysis of two fatigue scales in inflammatory conditions.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to assess the psychometric properties of two widely used fatigue scales in a sample of patients with inflammatory conditions. METHODS: Rasch analysis was used to examine scale reliability, item bias, unidimensionality and overall fit to the Rasch model. Sub-test methodology was utilised to attempt to improve model fit for the CFQ and BRAF-MDQ. RESULTS: Initial analysis displayed strong reliability (PSI=0.89 0.96), alongside a lack of item bias in both scales. However, evidence for unidimensionality was not found for either scale. Overall fit to the Rasch model was marginal for the CFQ, and misfitting for the BRAF-MDQ. Local dependency was observed, as well as significant item misfit for both scales. Sub-test modifications resulted in the best model fit for the BRAF-MDQ (χ2(16)=15.77, p=0.469) and the CFQ (χ2(25)=15.49, p=0.929). Modifications resulted in improved fit, reductions in measurement error, and the production of ordinal-to-interval conversion tables for both scales. Conversion tables apply the benefits of enhanced measurement accuracy, valid comparison of BRAF-MDQ and CFQ scores to other interval-level data, appropriate use in parametric statistics, and enhanced precision in clinical cut-off scores-without the need to change administration format. CONCLUSION: The BRAF-MDQ and CFQ are valid, reliable tools for fatigue assessment. Psychometric indices and content factors suggest the CFQ is suited to measuring general fatigue, particularly when response burden is a concern, while the BRAF-MDQ should be used in clinical presentations where other symptoms are severe and the impact of fatigue on daily living, emotional, and social well-being is of interest.

Modern health worries and annoyance from environmental factors are largely unrelated to smoking, alcohol consumption, and physical activity.

OBJECTIVE: Modern health worries, as well as environmental annoyance from chemical agents, noise, and electromagnetic exposure are associated with symptom reporting and marked affective-behavioural changes. As promotion and protection of health is a primary characteristic of these conditions, it can be expected that they will be related to less risk behaviour (smoking and alcohol consumption) and more health behaviour (physical activity), both cross-sectionally and longitudinally. METHODS: Hypotheses were tested in a sample of 2336 individuals participating in T1 and T2 data collection (3 years apart) of the Västerbotten Environmental Health Study, Sweden. Health-related behaviours were assessed using single self-report questions. Smoking was measured on a binary (yes-or-no) scale; frequency of alcohol consumption and physical activity was measured on a 5-point and a 4-point scale, respectively. RESULTS: Modern health worries showed no cross-sectional association with the three behaviours, whereas annoyance was typically inversely, very weakly, related to smoking and alcohol consumption. Physical activity was significantly positively associated only with chemical annoyance. None of the variables significantly predicted change of behaviours at T2 after controlling for the respective T1 value and demographic variables. CONCLUSIONS: Individuals with high levels of modern health worries and annoyance from various environmental agents are not clearly characterized by a healthier lifestyle. Perhaps they focus on the alleviation of their existing symptoms; alternatively, somatic symptom distress decreases their cognitive-affective resources necessary for a long-term life style change.

Changing Mindsets About Side Effects of the COVID-19 Vaccination: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Side-effect concerns are a major barrier to vaccination against COVID-19 and other diseases. Identifying cost- and time-efficient interventions to improve vaccine experience and reduce vaccine hesitancy-without withholding information about side effects-is critical. PURPOSE: Determine whether a brief symptom as positive signals mindset intervention can improve vaccine experience and reduce vaccine hesitancy after the COVID-19 vaccination. METHODS: English-speaking adults (18+) were recruited during the 15-min wait period after receiving their second dose of the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccination and were randomly allocated to the symptom as positive signals mindset condition or the treatment as usual control. Participants in the mindset intervention viewed a 3:43-min video explaining how the body responds to vaccinations and how common side effects such as fatigue, sore arm, and fever are signs that the vaccination is helping the body boost immunity. The control group received standard vaccination center information. RESULTS: Mindset participants (N = 260) versus controls (N = 268) reported significantly less worry about symptoms at day 3 [t(506)=2.60, p=.01, d=0.23], fewer symptoms immediately following the vaccine [t(484)=2.75, p=.006, d=0.24], and increased intentions to vaccinate against viruses like COVID-19 in the future [t(514)=-2.57, p=.01, d=0.22]. No significant differences for side-effect frequency at day 3, coping, or impact. CONCLUSIONS: This study supports the use of a brief video aimed at reframing symptoms as positive signals to reduce worry and increase future vaccine intentions. CLINICAL TRIAL INFORMATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry: ACTRN12621000722897p.

Side-effect concerns are a major barrier to vaccination against COVID-19 and other diseases. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to determine whether a brief symptom as positive signals mindset intervention could improve vaccine experience and reduce vaccine hesitancy after the COVID-19 vaccination. Participants were recruited during the 15-min wait period after receiving their second dose of the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccination and were randomly allocated to a treatment as usual control condition or to a mindset intervention condition which entailed watching a 3:43-min video explaining how the body responds to vaccinations and how common side effects such as fatigue, sore arm, and fever are signs that the vaccination is helping the body boost immunity. Compared with participants in the control condition, participants in the mindset intervention condition reported significantly less worry about symptoms at day 3, fewer symptoms immediately following the vaccine and increased intentions to vaccinate against viruses like COVID-19 in the future. No significant differences emerged for side-effect frequency at day 3, coping, or impact. These finding provide initial support for cost- and time-efficient interventions to improve vaccine experience and reduce vaccine hesitancy without withholding information about side effects.

Trust in the approval process of medicines mediates the effect of an educational intervention on the pain relief induced by a generic analgesic.

BACKGROUND: Generic medicines have been associated with less efficacy compared to originator products. Educational videos explaining generic medicines can have a positive effect on perceptions of generic drugs and their pain-relieving effect. The central aim of the current study was to examine whether trust in the governmental approval process of medicines mediates the effect of educational video interventions on the pain-relieving effect induced by a generic medicine and whether trust can be built by improving individuals' understanding of generic medication. METHODS: This is a secondary analysis of a randomized controlled trial where participants with frequent tension headaches were randomly assigned to either watching a video explaining generic drugs (n = 69) or a video informing about headaches (control group: n = 34). After watching the video, participants took an originator and a generic pain analgesic in a randomized order to treat their next two consecutive headaches. Pain severity was measured before and 1 h after taking the medicine. RESULTS: A multiple serial mediator model showed that improving individuals' understanding of generic medicines is associated with increased trust in medicines. Both factors together, understanding and trust, significantly mediated the effect of the video education about generic drugs on the generic's pain-relieving effect (total indirect effect: coefficient: 0.20, 95% CI: 0.42, -0.0001). CONCLUSION: Results of this study show that improving individuals' understanding of generic medication and trust in the process of approving medicines should be considered as important mechanisms of future educational interventions about generic medicines.

Did a Nocebo Effect Contribute to the Rise in Special Education Enrollment Following the Flint, Michigan Water Crisis?

Background: Exposure to waterborne lead during the Flint Water Crisis during April 2014-October 2015 is believed to have caused increased special education enrollment in Flint children. Method: This retrospective population-based cohort study utilized de-identified data for children under six years of age who had their blood lead tested during 2011 to 2019, and special education outcomes data for children enrolled in public schools for corresponding academic years (2011-12 to 2019-20) in Flint, Detroit (control city) and the State of Michigan. Trends in the following crisis-related covariates were also evaluated: waterborne contaminants, poverty, nutrition, city governance, school district policies, negative community expectations, media coverage and social media interactions. Results: Between 2011 and 2019, including the 2014-15 crisis period, the incidence of elevated blood lead in Flint children (≥ 5µg/dL) was always at least 47% lower than in the control city of Detroit (p < .0001) and was also never significantly higher than that for all children tested in Michigan (p = 0.33). Nonetheless, special education enrollment in Flint spiked relative to Detroit and Michigan (p < .0001). There is actually an inverse relationship between childhood blood lead and special education enrollment in Flint. Conclusion: This study failed to confirm any positive association between actual childhood blood lead levels and special education enrollment in Flint. Negative psychological effects associated with media predictions of brain damage could have created a self-fulfilling prophecy via a nocebo effect. The findings demonstrate a need for improved media coverage of complex events like the Flint Water Crisis.

Impact of Television Depictions of Gout on Perceptions of Illness: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

OBJECTIVE: Gout is a chronic disease that can be effectively managed with long-term urate-lowering therapy. However, it is frequently portrayed on screen as an acute disease caused by a poor diet that should be managed with lifestyle changes. This study was undertaken to investigate the impact of a fictional television depiction of gout on perceptions of the disease and its management. METHODS: In a randomized controlled single-blind study, 200 members of the public watched either a 19-minute commercial television comedy episode that depicted gout as an acute disease caused by poor diet and managed with lifestyle changes, or a control episode from the same television series that did not mention gout or other diseases. Participants completed a survey regarding their perceptions of gout, its likely causes, and management strategies. RESULTS: Participants randomized to watch the gout-related episode believed gout had greater consequences (mean score of 7.1 versus 6.2 on an 11-point Likert scale; P < 0.001) and were more likely to rank the most important cause as poor eating habits compared to the control group (70% versus 38%; P < 0.001). They were also less likely to believe it is caused by genetic factors or chance. Participants watching the gout-related episode believed a change in diet would be a more effective management strategy (9.0 versus 8.4; P = 0.004) and long-term medication use would be less effective (6.9 versus 7.6; P = 0.007) compared to participants in the control group. CONCLUSION: Television depictions of gout can perpetuate inaccurate beliefs regarding causes of the disease and underemphasize effective medical strategies required in chronic disease management.

The Treatment Expectation Questionnaire (TEX-Q): Validation of a generic multidimensional scale measuring patients' treatment expectations.

BACKGROUND: Patients' expectations, as a central mechanism behind placebo and nocebo effects, are an important predictor of health outcomes. Yet, theoretically based generic assessment tools allowing for an integrated understanding of expectations across conditions and treatments are lacking. Based on the preliminary 35-item version, this study reports the development and validation of the Treatment Expectation Questionnaire (TEX-Q), a generic, multidimensional self-report scale measuring patients' expectations of medical and psychological treatments. METHODS: The TEX-Q was developed in a validation sample of n = 251 patients undergoing different treatments using exploratory factor analyses and item analyses, as well as analysis of convergent and divergent validity. Confirmatory factor analysis was conducted in an independent sample of n = 303 patients undergoing cancer treatment. Two-weeks test-retest reliability was assessed in n = 28 psychosomatic outpatients. RESULTS: Factor analyses revealed six theoretically founded stable subscales. The TEX-Q assesses expectations of treatment benefit, positive impact, adverse events, negative impact, process and behavioural control with a total of 15 items. Results for the subscales and the sum score indicated good internal consistency (α = .71-.92), moderate to high test-retest reliability (r = .39-.76) as well as good convergent validity with regard to other expectation measures (r = .42-.58) and divergent validity with regard to measures of generalized expectations (r < .32) and psychopathology (r < .28). CONCLUSIONS: While further validation is needed, the results suggest that the TEX-Q is a valid and reliable scale for the generic, multidimensional assessment of patients' treatment expectations. The TEX-Q overcomes constraints of ad-hoc and disease-specific scales, while allowing to compare the impact of different expectation constructs across conditions and treatments.

The mode of delivery and content of communication strategies used in mandatory and non-mandatory biosimilar transitions: a systematic review with meta-analysis.

Effective patient-provider communication is crucial to promote shared decision-making. However, it is unclear how to explain treatment changes to ensure patient acceptance, such as when transitioning from a bio-originator to a biosimilar. This review investigates communication strategies used to educate patients on transitioning to biosimilars and explores whether the willingness to transition and treatment persistence differs for the delivery (verbal or written) and the amount of information provided. MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, and relevant conference databases were systematically searched. Communication strategies from 33 studies (88% observational cohort studies) published from 2012 to 2020 were synthesized and willingness to transition, persistence, and subjective adverse events explored. Patients only received information verbally in 11 studies. The remaining 22 studies also provided written information. Cost-saving was the main reason provided for the transition. Patients were most willing to transition when receiving written and verbal information (χ2 = 5.83, p = .02) or written information that only addressed a few (3-5) concerns (χ2 = 16.08, p < .001). There was no significant difference for persistence or subjective adverse events (p's > .05). Few randomized controlled trials have been conducted. Available data shows more willingness to transition when patients received written and verbal information. Initial documents should contain basic information and consultations or telephone calls used to address concerns.

Using family-centered communication to optimize patient-provider-companion encounters about changing to biosimilars: A randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To explore whether family-centered communication impacts decisions and optimizes patient-companion-provider consultations. METHODS: A parallel, two-arm randomized controlled trial was conducted with 108 participants acting as patients with inflammatory arthritis or companions. Pairs attended a mock consultation where a physician explained the change from a bio-originator to a biosimilar using family-centered or patient-only communication. Participants reported their willingness to transition, risk perceptions, understanding and social support, and completed various scales including the Patient Perception Scale. Interviews helped understand perceptions towards the consultation. RESULTS: Family-centered communication did not impact willingness to change or cognitive risk perceptions compared to patient-only communication. However, it improved emotional risk perceptions (p = 0.047, Cohen's d=.55) and satisfaction with communication (p = 0.015, Cohen's d=.71). Feeling the explanation was reassuring was associated with less worry (p = 0.004). Receiving emotional support (p = 0.014) and companions asking fewer questions (p = 0.046) were associated with higher recall. The intervention improved companion involvement (p < 0.001, Cohen's d= 1.23) and support (p = 0.002, Cohen's d=.86). Interviews showed that encouraging questions, inclusive body language, and acknowledging companions facilitated involvement. CONCLUSION: Family-centered communication augments patient-companion-provider encounters but does not influence willingness to change treatment. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Practitioners can use family-centered communication when discussing biosimilars but should provide reassurance, encourage emotional support, and summarize key points to improve understanding.

Loneliness Across the COVID-19 Pandemic: Risk Factors in Norwegian Young People.

Background: There is evidence of increasing levels of loneliness in Norwegian young people before the COVID-19 pandemic. It is not clear how the COVID-19 pandemic, and the associated necessary restrictions, impacted on these trends. Aims: To examine how loneliness in young people changed across the pandemic, how loneliness relates to demographic characteristics and how different pandemic restrictions impacted loneliness. Method: We analyzed data from three waves of a Norwegian national higher education student survey (the SHoT-study). Data was examined from 2018 from a total of 49,836 students, 2021 from 62,212 students, and from 2022 from 53,362 (response rates 31-35%). Loneliness was measured by "The Three-Item Loneliness Scale" (T-ILS). Results: There was a sharp increase in loneliness from 2018 to 2021, and a reduction in levels of loneliness in 2022, although at increased levels compared to prior to the pandemic. Females consistently report higher levels of loneliness than males, with a larger difference during the peak of the pandemic. There were higher rates of loneliness in geographical regions with higher COVID rates and greater pandemic-related restrictions during 2021. Loneliness was lower among students reporting more days on campus in 2021 and for those with lectures on campus in 2022, both with dose-response associations. Conclusions: Loneliness is a major public health problem among young adults in higher education. Loneliness increased during the pandemic and has decreased but is still not back to pre-pandemic levels. The results suggest the importance of open campuses and in-person lectures, for increased social connectedness among young people.

Health Scares: Tracing Their Nature, Growth and Spread.

Background: Health scares are highly publicised threats to health that increase public concern and protective behaviours but are later shown to be unfounded. Although health scares have become more common in recent times, they have received very little research attention. This is despite the fact that health scares often have negative outcomes for individuals and community by affecting health behaviours and causing high levels of often unnecessary anxiety. Method: In this paper we undertook a review and analysis of the major types of health scares as well as the background factors associated with health scares and their spread. Results: We found most health scares fell into seven main categories; environmental contaminants, food, malicious incidents, medical treatments, public health interventions, radiation from technology and exotic diseases. For most health scares there are important background factors and incident characteristics that affect how they develop. Background factors include conspiracy theories, trust in governmental agencies, anxiety, modern health worries and wariness of chemicals. Incident characteristic include being newly developed, not understood or unseen, man-made rather than natural and whether the incident is out of personal control. We also identified the aspects of traditional and social media that exacerbate the rapid spread of health scares. Conclusion: More research is needed to identify the characteristics of media stories that intensify the levels of public concern. Guidelines around the media's reporting of health incidents and potential health threats may be necessary in order to reduce levels of public anxiety and the negative public health impact of health scares.

Pharmacists' confidence in explaining biosimilars to patients before a nationwide medicine change: A cross-sectional study.

Background: Biosimilars can improve patient access to biological medicines. Although biosimilars have been shown to be equally effective and safe, some patients remain reluctant to transition to biosimilars. Pharmacists may support patients changing to biosimilars and are often at the frontline for dealing with queries and concerns, but their confidence and readiness for this role are unclear. Objective: This study examines pharmacists' confidence in explaining biosimilars to patients and explores the information they would provide in response to common queries. Methods: Practicing community, hospital, and primary care pharmacists (N = 142) in New Zealand completed an Internet-based survey on their experience and familiarity with bio-originators and biosimilars, attitudes and concerns towards biosimilars, confidence in explaining key concepts, and responses to common queries. A hierarchical linear regression was conducted to examine possible factors associated with confidence in explaining biosimilars, and a content synthesis was conducted to examine responses to common patient queries. Results: Pharmacists were most confident in explaining how biosimilars are administered, their efficacy, and cost-saving, and least confident in describing manufacturing and testing. Respondents who had more positive attitudes (B = 1.64, p < .001) and more familiarity with biosimilars (B = 27.15, p < .001) were more confident in educating patients. Pharmacists' main concerns about biosimilars included reduced efficacy, safety, and a lack of knowledge and acceptance. Responses to common queries were diverse but further highlighted several gaps in knowledge. Gaps included being unable to define biosimilars, provide information on side effects, and believing that biosimilars undergo the same testing process as bio-originators. Pharmacists wanted resources (written and Internet-based) to improve their knowledge and ability to educate patients. Conclusions: Pharmacists reported a lack of knowledge and confidence in explaining manufacturing processes and testing of biosimilars. Additional resources are needed to support their practice and may help improve patient and companion acceptance of biosimilars.

Prioritising long-term outcomes for preterm babies: A survey of consumers and clinicians.

AIM: To determine if consumers and clinicians believe intelligence or health outcomes are more important long-term outcomes for babies born preterm. METHODS: Prospective, online survey of six outcomes ranked using a hierarchy ladder, Likert scale and a hypothetical scenario: education (complete secondary school); longevity (70 years of age or more); money (sufficient for rent and food); normal weight; good health and intelligence. Participants were clinicians taking care of preterm babies, parents of preterm babies, ex-preterm adults and adult controls. RESULTS: The survey was completed by 145 participants (35 controls, 36 clinicians, 39 parents and 35 ex-preterm adults). Health was the most frequently top-ranked variable on the hierarchy ladder (health; 99/145 (68.3%), money; 17/145 (11.7%), longevity; 10/145 (6.9%), education; 8/145 (5.5%), normal weight; 6/145 (4.1%), intelligence; 5/145 (3.4%), P < 0.0001), with no statistical difference between the groups. On a 5-point Likert scale, participants were most likely to agree that sufficient money, health and finishing secondary school were important for preterm babies to have a good life (mean (SD): money 4.43 (0.81); health 4.39 (0.72); education 4.37 (0.81); normal weight 4.10 (0.81); intelligence 4.03 (0.94); longevity 4.01 (1.07), P < 0.0001). In the scenario, the option of an ex-preterm adult having a healthy life with low socio-economic status (SES), was preferred over high SES with an unhealthy life (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Health was perceived as the most important long-term outcome for preterm babies. Future research should prioritise good health outcomes for babies born preterm.

Moving forward: Implementing health psychology research to improve patient acceptance of biosimilars.

As more biosimilars enter the pharmaceutical market, patient acceptance remains a significant barrier to their uptake. Psychological factors, such as negative expectations, are important causes of patient hesitancy. As a result, patients can develop nocebo responses following a transition, discontinue biosimilar treatment early, or have poor adherence. These negative outcomes may offset some of the cost-saving potential of biosimilars. Key healthcare professionals such as pharmacists, physicians, and nurses already play a noteworthy role in educating and transitioning patients. However, given the psychological aspect of biosimilar acceptance, it is logical for healthcare professionals and researchers to draw on research and theory from health psychology. This commentary outlines how a multidisciplinary approach can add to the understanding of the mechanisms behind patient resistance to biosimilars and help engage patients in the transitioning process. It also explores how health psychology strategies that have been successful in similar areas can be translated to help conduct more effective transitions. Future directions in research are discussed.

Changes in mental health problems and suicidal behaviour in students and their associations with COVID-19-related restrictions in Norway: a national repeated cross-sectional analysis.

OBJECTIVE: The COVID-19 pandemic has had a devastating impact on higher education, with the closure of student campuses. The aim of this study was to examine changes and prevalence of mental health problems, suicidal ideation and suicidal behaviour, and their associations with COVID-19-related restrictions. DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: As part of the SHoT-study in Norway, 62 498 students completed an online questionnaire (65.6% women; response rate of 34.4%) in March 2021. Data were compared with previous waves, conducted in 2018, 2014 and 2010. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Mental health problems were assessed using the Hopkins Symptoms Checklist. Suicidal ideation, suicide attempts and non-suicidal self-harm (NSSH) were assessed with three items drawn from the Adult Psychiatric Morbidity Survey, and thoughts of NSSH were assessed with one item from the Child and Adolescent Self-Harm in Europe study. RESULTS: There was a significant increase in mental health problems from 2010 to 2021, and especially from 2018 (men: 27%/women: 45%) to 2021 (men: 41%/women: 62%, p <0.001). A similar pattern was also observed for suicidal thoughts. Unlike previous waves, there were large geographical differences in mental health problems in 2021, which mapped onto the different levels of COVID-19 cases and regional COVID-19-related restrictions. There was a significant negative dose-response association between days spent physically on campus and both mental health problems and indicators of suicide risk. We found the fewer days spent on campus in the last 2 weeks, the higher levels of mental health problems during the same time period. There was also an association between days on campus and a higher prevalence of suicidal thoughts, NSSH and suicide attempts in the last year. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates a sharp increase and disturbing levels of mental health problems and suicide risk among students during the COVID-19 pandemic. Although causal conclusions cannot be drawn, the associations between closure of campuses and mental problems emphasise the importance of having access to campuses for student well-being.