Key considerations for the future of mental health epidemiology.

Psychiatric epidemiology has led to substantial progress in our understanding of the causes of mental health disorders. The increasing sophistication of etiologic psychiatric research has been accompanied by a greater focus on the biological and genetic causes of psychiatric disorders, to some extent diverging from field's early focus on the burden of poor mental health due to a breadth of social and economic conditions. We argue that the moment is ripe for advancing a mental health epidemiology that can reconnect the field to these earlier-and still central-concerns, while retaining the strengths of psychiatric epidemiology. Embracing five considerations can help advance the evolving field of mental health epidemiology. First, conceptually, an ambitious vision for the future of the field necessitates investment in refining our definitions and methodologies. Second, there is a need for a renewed focus on the macrosocial determinants of mental health. Third, a deeper engagement with mental health inequities should be central to our scholarship. Fourth, the field would benefit from a more deliberate assessment of the mechanisms leading to adverse mental health outcomes, which can then be used to inform novel interventions. Finally, realizing this future is contingent upon a wholesale commitment to studying population mental health globally.

Depression and assets during the COVID-19 pandemic: A longitudinal study of mental health across income and savings groups.

The prevalence of depression in U.S. adults during the COVID-19 pandemic has been high overall and particularly high among persons with fewer assets. Building on previous work on assets and mental health, we document the burden of depression in groups based on income and savings during the first two years of the COVID-19 pandemic. Using a nationally representative, longitudinal panel study of U.S. adults (N = 1,271) collected in April-May 2020 (T1), April-May 2021 (T2), and April-May 2022 (T3), we estimated the adjusted odds of reporting probable depression at any time during the COVID-19 pandemic with generalized estimating equations (GEE). We explored probable depression-defined as a score of ≥10 on the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9)-by four asset groups, defined by median income (≥$65,000) and savings (≥$20,000) categories. The prevalence of probable depression was consistently high in Spring 2020, Spring 2021, and Spring 2022 with 27.9% of U.S. adults reporting probable depression in Spring 2022. We found that there were four distinct asset groups that experienced different depression trajectories over the COVID-19 pandemic. Low income-low savings asset groups had the highest level of probable depression across time, reporting 3.7 times the odds (95% CI: 2.6, 5.3) of probable depression at any time relative to high income-high savings asset groups. While probable depression stayed relatively stable across time for most groups, the low income-low savings group reported significantly higher levels of probable depression at T2, compared to T1, and the high income-low savings group reported significantly higher levels of probable depression at T3 than T1. The weighted average of probable depression across time was 42.9% for low income-low savings groups, 24.3% for high income-low savings groups, 19.4% for low income-high savings groups, and 14.0% for high income-high savings groups. Efforts to ameliorate both savings and income may be necessary to mitigate the mental health consequences of pandemics.

Perceptions of the determinants of health across income and urbanicity levels in eight countries.

BACKGROUND: A clear understanding of public perceptions of the social determinants of health remains lacking. This paper aimed to describe the relationship between income and urbanicity levels and public views of the determinants of health in eight middle-and high-income countries that varied across multiple characteristics. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional online survey in Brazil, China, Germany, Egypt, India, Indonesia, Nigeria, and the United States. Respondents were asked to select what they considered to be most important for health out of a list of ten determinants. We stratified the results by income and urbanicity levels and tested significance of differences between groups using two-tailed χ2 tests. Multivariable logistic regression models tested associations between demographic factors and the likelihood of respondents selecting the genetics, healthcare, income and wealth, or social support determinants. RESULTS: Here we show 8753 respondents across eight countries. Rankings of determinants are similar across income groups, except for two determinants. Respondents in the highest income group rank genetics in higher proportions (32.4%, 95%CI: 29.0%,35.8%) compared to other income groups. Conversely, those in lowest income group rank social support more frequently (27.9%, 95%CI: 25.3%,30.7%) than other income groups. Those living in urban settings rank healthcare in higher proportions (61.2%, 95%CI: 59.0%,63.4%) compared to non-urban respondents; meanwhile, higher proportions (26.6%, 95%CI: 24.9%,28.3%) of non-urban respondents rank social support as important for health compared to urban respondents. CONCLUSION: Demographic factors play a role in shaping public views of what affects health. Advancing public understanding about determinants of health requires tailoring public health messaging to account for socioeconomic position within a population.

Various factors determine our health, such as our environment, education, and genetics. Here, we explore how people from different income and urban backgrounds view the factors that affect health. We surveyed participants from Brazil, China, Germany, Egypt, India, Indonesia, Nigeria, and the United States. Respondents selected the most important factors for health from a list of ten choices. Overall, people's views on these factors were comparable across income groups, with exceptions. Those with higher incomes tended to emphasize the importance of genetics more, while lower-income individuals valued social support. People in urban areas prioritized healthcare, while those in non-urban areas valued social support. These findings suggest that factors such as income and where people live influence their views about health determinants. These factors should be considered in public health messaging and strategies to promote health amongst different groups.

News media as a commercial determinant of health.

Commercial determinants of health frameworks aim to identify the features and actions of corporate entities that can influence health. This Viewpoint conceptualises the work of the news media as a set of commercial forces and provides a framework that can help researchers better understand how features and actions of the news media shape health and health equity. We discuss four key features of news media action that can shape health: agenda setting, framing, priming, and tactics of persuasion. Beyond the direct role of the media in shaping health, we also explore pathways (ie, public relation activities, advertising, and economic pressures) in which the media is used by other commercial actors to affect health. A better understanding of how news media operates can help inform efforts to improve media actions to aid in improving population health outcomes.

Mental Health and U.S. Attitudes Toward Social Determinants of Health Policies.

INTRODUCTION: Research has suggested that individual health may influence policy attitudes, yet the relationship between mental health and policy support is understudied. Clarifying this relationship may help inform policies that can improve the population mental health. To address this gap, this study measures national support for 5 social determinants of health policy priorities and their relation to mental health and political affiliation. METHODS: This study assessed support for 5 policy priorities related to the social determinants of health using a nationally representative survey of US adults (n=2,430) conducted in March-April 2023. Logistic regression was used to estimate the predicted probability of identifying each priority as important, test differences in support by self-rated mental health, and evaluate whether partisanship modified these relationships. Analyses were conducted in 2023. RESULTS: The majority of US adults, across partisan identities, supported 5 policy priorities related to improving the economy (84%), healthcare affordability (77%), improving K-12 education (76%), housing affordability (68%), and childcare affordability (61%). Worse mental health predicted significantly greater support for addressing housing affordability (73.9% vs 66.2%), and partisanship modified the relationship between mental health and support for improving the economy, improving K-12 education, and housing affordability. CONCLUSIONS: In 2023, there was substantial bipartisan support for federal policy action to address the social determinants of health, and worse mental health was related to greater policy support, particularly among Democrats. Federal policymakers have a broad consensus to take action to address the social determinants of health, which may improve the population mental health.

Experience of Personal Loss Due to Drug Overdose Among US Adults.

Importance: Since 1999, over 1 million people have died of a drug overdose in the US. However, little is known about the bereaved, meaning their family, friends, and acquaintances, and their views on the importance of addiction as a policy priority. Objectives: To quantify the scope of the drug overdose crisis in terms of personal overdose loss (ie, knowing someone who died of a drug overdose) and to assess the policy implications of this loss. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study used data from a nationally representative survey of US adults (age ≥18 years), the fourth wave of the COVID-19 and Life Stressors Impact on Mental Health and Well-Being (CLIMB) study, which was conducted from March to April 2023. Main Outcomes and Measures: Respondents reported whether they knew someone who died of a drug overdose and the nature of their relationship with the decedent(s). They also reported their political party affiliation and rated the importance of addiction as a policy issue. Logistic regression models estimated the associations between sociodemographic characteristics and political party affiliation and the probability of experiencing a personal overdose loss and between the experience of overdose loss and the perceived salience of addiction as a policy issue. Survey weights adjusted for sampling design and nonresponse. Results: Of the 7802 panelists invited to participate, 2479 completed the survey (31.8% response rate); 153 were excluded because they did not know whether they knew someone who died of a drug overdose, resulting in a final analytic sample of 2326 (51.4% female; mean [SD] age, 48.12 [0.48] years). Of these respondents, 32.0% (95% CI, 28.8%-34.3%) reported any personal overdose loss, translating to 82.7 million US adults. A total of 18.9% (95% CI, 17.1%-20.8%) of all respondents, translating to 48.9 million US adults, reported having a family member or close friend die of drug overdose. Personal overdose loss was more prevalent among groups with lower income (<$30 000: 39.9%; ≥$100 000: 26.0%). The experience of overdose loss did not differ across political party groups (Democrat: 29.0%; Republican: 33.0%; independent or none: 34.2%). Experiencing overdose loss was associated with a greater odds of viewing addiction as an extremely or very important policy issue (adjusted odds ratio, 1.37; 95% CI, 1.09-1.72) after adjustment for sociodemographic and geographic characteristics and political party affiliation. Conclusions and Relevance: This cross-sectional study found that 32% of US adults reported knowing someone who died of a drug overdose and that personal overdose loss was associated with greater odds of endorsing addiction as an important policy issue. The findings suggest that mobilization of this group may be an avenue to facilitate greater policy change.

Prevalence and Risk Factors of Depression and Posttraumatic Stress Disorder After a Mass Shooting.

This cross-sectional study examines the self-reported mental health outcomes of adults 4 years after witnessing and surviving the shooting at the Route 91 Harvest Music Festival in Las Vegas, Nevada.

Pandemic stressors and mental health indicators in eight countries.

PURPOSE: The Covid-19 pandemic has exacted a significant physical, financial, social, and emotional toll on populations throughout the world. This study aimed to document the association between pandemic stressors and mental health during the pandemic across countries that differ in cultural, geographic, economic, and demographic factors. METHODS: We administered an online survey randomly in Brazil, China, Germany, Egypt, India, Indonesia, Nigeria, and the United States from September 2020 to November 2020. This survey included questions on Covid-19-related stressors as well as the Patient Health Questionnaire-2 and the Primary Care PTSD Checklist to screen for depression and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) symptoms, respectively. We performed bivariable and multivariable regression analyses to assess the prevalence and odds ratios of overall depression symptoms and probable PTSD and in relation to stressors across countries. RESULTS: Among 8754 respondents, 28.9% (95% CI 27.5-30.0%) experienced depression symptoms, and 5.1% (95% CI 4.5-6.0%) experienced probable PTSD. The highest prevalence of depression symptoms was in Egypt (41.3%, 95% CI 37.6-45.0%) and lowest in the United States (24.9%, 95% CI 22.3-27.7%). The highest prevalence of probable PTSD was in Brazil (7.3%, 95% CI 5.6-9.4%) and the lowest in China (1.2%, 95% CI 0.7-2.0%). Overall, experiencing six or more Covid-19-related stressors was associated with both depression symptoms (OR 1.90, 95% CI 1.46-2.48) and probable PTSD (OR 13.8, 95% CI 9.66-19.6). CONCLUSION: The association between pandemic related stressors and the burden of adverse mental health indicators early in the Covid-19 pandemic transcended geographic, economic, cultural, and demographic differences between countries. The short-term and long-term impacts of the pandemic on mental health should be incorporated in efforts to tackle the consequences of Covid-19.

Assets and depression in U.S. adults during the COVID-19 pandemic: a systematic review.

PURPOSE: Mental health is shaped by social and economic contexts, which were altered during the COVID-19 pandemic. No study has systematically reviewed the literature on the relation between different assets and depression during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review of the literature on financial (e.g. income/savings), physical (e.g., home ownership), and social (e.g., marital status, educational attainment) assets and depression in U.S. adults. For each asset type, we created binary comparisons to report on the direction of the relationship and described if each study reported insignificant, positive, negative, or mixed associations. RESULTS: Among the 41 articles identified, we found that income was the most studied asset (n=34), followed by education (n=25), marital status (n=18), home ownership (n=5), and savings (n=4). 88%, 100%, and 100% of articles reported a significant association of higher income, home ownership, and higher savings, respectively, with less depression. The association between marital status and education with depression was more nuanced: 72% (13 of 18) studies showed that unmarried persons had greater risk of depression than married or cohabitating persons and 52% (13 of 25) of studies reported no significant difference in depression across educational groups. CONCLUSION: This work adds to the literature a deeper understanding of how different assets relate to depression. In the context of largescale traumatic events, policies that maintain and protect access to social, physical, and financial assets may help to protect mental health.

Symptoms of Posttraumatic Stress During the COVID-19 Pandemic in the Governmental Public Health Workforce and General Population.

We aimed to estimate the prevalence of COVID-19-related posttraumatic stress symptoms (PTSS) in the governmental public health workforce and in US adults, assess differences in reporting PTSS within subgroups, and evaluate whether frontline workers reported higher levels of PTSS than persons in other jobs. We used data from 2 nationally representative studies: the 2021 Public Health Workforce Interests and Needs Survey (PH WINS) and the COVID-19 and Life Stressors Impact on Mental Health and Well-being (CLIMB) study. Our study found that the state and local governmental public health workforce was more likely to report PTSS than the general adult population. Almost a quarter of public health agency employees (24.7%) and 21.1% of adults reported at least 3 symptoms of posttraumatic stress. Differences in levels of PTSS appeared within demographic groups for both samples. Personal care and service frontline workers had 4.3 times the odds of reporting symptoms of posttraumatic stress than non-frontline workers.

Data to Improve Global Health Equity-Key Challenges.

This JAMA Forum discusses how to use data to help achieve global health equity, the challenges in using data to narrow health gaps, and ways to work toward a world with fewer health gaps.

Depression and PTSD among Houston Residents who Experienced Hurricane Harvey and COVID-19: Implications for Urban Areas Affected by Multiple Disasters.

Little is known about the combined impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and other major disasters on mental health. Hurricane Harvey hit the Gulf Coast in 2017, resulting in substantial costs, significant levels of displacement, and approximately 100 deaths, and was followed in 2020 by the COVID-19 pandemic. We randomly sampled 1167 Houstonians from 88 designated super-neighborhoods and surveyed them about their demographics, event-specific traumas and stressors, and symptoms of current depression and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). We estimated the prevalence of depression (5.8%) and PTSD (12.6%) more than three years after Hurricane Harvey, and assessed the relative influence of event-specific stressors and traumas on current mental health. Overall, we observed evidence for two key findings that are salient for residents of urban environments in the context of multiple disasters. First, stressors were primary influences on depression, whereas both stressors and traumas influenced PTSD. Second, the influences of stressors and traumas on depression and PTSD symptoms faded with time.

Use of machine learning methods to understand discussions of female genital mutilation/cutting on social media.

Female genital mutilation/cutting (FGM/C) describes several procedures that involve injury to the vulva or vagina for nontherapeutic reasons. Though at least 200 million women and girls living in 30 countries have undergone FGM/C, there is a paucity of studies focused on public perception of FGM/C. We used machine learning methods to characterize discussion of FGM/C on Twitter in English from 2015 to 2020. Twitter has emerged in recent years as a source for seeking and sharing health information and misinformation. We extracted text metadata from user profiles to characterize the individuals and locations involved in conversations about FGM/C. We extracted major discussion themes from posts using correlated topic modeling. Finally, we extracted features from posts and applied random forest models to predict user engagement. The volume of tweets addressing FGM/C remained fairly stable across years. Conversation was mostly concentrated among the United States and United Kingdom through 2017, but shifted to Nigeria and Kenya in 2020. Some of the discussion topics associated with FGM/C across years included Islam, International Day of Zero Tolerance, current news stories, education, activism, male circumcision, human rights, and feminism. Tweet length and follower count were consistently strong predictors of engagement. Our findings suggest that (1) discussion about FGM/C has not evolved significantly over time, (2) the majority of the conversation about FGM/C on English-speaking Twitter is advocating for an end to the practice, (3) supporters of Donald Trump make up a substantial voice in the conversation about FGM/C, and (4) understanding the nuances in how people across cultures refer to and discuss FGM/C could be important for the design of public health communication and intervention.

The Case for Optimism in Health and Health Care.

This JAMA Health Forum discusses challenges to the nation's health and the case for optimism for better population health based on 3 pillars.

Global Health Equity Requires Global Equity.

Many global health challenges are characterized by the inequitable patterning of their health and economic consequences, which are etched along the lines of pre-existing inequalities in resources, power, and opportunity. These links require us to reconsider how we define global health equity, and what we consider as most consequential in its pursuit. In this article, we discuss the extent to which improving underlying global equity is an essential prerequisite to global health equity. We conclude that if we are to improve global health equity, there is a need to focus more on foundational-rather than proximal-causes of ill health and propose ways in which this can be achieved.

Prevalence of depressive symptoms in U.S. adults during the COVID-19 pandemic: A systematic review.

The COVID-19 pandemic has led to a worsening of mental health among U.S. adults. However, no review to date has synthesized the overall prevalence of population depressive symptoms in the U.S. over the COVID-19 pandemic. We aimed to document the population prevalence of depressive symptoms and psychological distress across time since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, both to identify patterns that emerged in the literature and to assess the data sources, methods, sampling, and measurement used to examine population mental health during the pandemic. In a systematic review of the peer review literature, we identified 49 articles reporting 88 prevalence points of depressive symptoms and related constructs in nationally representative samples of U.S. adults from March 2020 to June 2021. First, we found that the average prevalence of poor mental health across studies was 12.9% for severe depression, 26.0% for at least moderate depression, and 36.0% for at least mild depression. Second, we found that women reported significantly higher prevalence of probable depression than men in 63% of studies that reported depression levels by gender and that results on statistically significant differences between racial and ethnic groups were mixed. Third, we found that the 49 articles published were based on 12 studies; the most common sources were the Household Pulse Survey (n = 15, 31%), the AmeriSpeak panel (n = 8, 16%), the Qualtrics panel (n = 8, 16%), and the Understanding America Study (n = 5, 10%). Prevalence estimates varied based on mental health screening instruments and cutoffs used. The most commonly used instruments were the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ) (n = 36, 73%) and the Kessler (n = 8, 16%) series. While the prevalence of population depression varied over time depending on the survey instruments, severity, and constructs reported, the overall prevalence of depression remained high from March 2020 through June 2021 across instruments and severity. Understanding the scope of population mental health can help policymakers and providers address and prepare to meet the ongoing and future mental health needs of U.S. adults in the post-COVID-19 context and beyond.

Vector-Borne and Zoonotic Diseases in the Eastern Mediterranean Region: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: World Health Organization Eastern Mediterranean Region (WHO EMR) has 40% people in the world in need of humanitarian assistance. This systematic review explores selected vector-borne and zoonotic diseases (VBZDs) of importance to EMR in terms of disease burden across countries and periods, disaggregated across sex, age groups, education levels, income status, and rural/urban areas, related vector or animal source reduction measures, and public health, social and economic impacts and related interventions. METHODS: We used the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines and reviewed articles in PubMed, Embase, and WHO Global Index Medicus published between 1st of January 2011 and 27th of June 2022. Thirteen VBZDs with at least one reported outbreak in the last five years in the region or prioritized as per previous analysis at the WHO global and regional level and based on expert consultations, were included as part of the analysis. RESULTS: The review included 295 studies-55% on leishmaniasis and dengue combined, and 75% studies from Pakistan, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, and Iran combined. Hospital-based and nationally representative studies constituted 60% and 10% respectively. Males were predominantly affected in most diseases; children reported high burden of Leishmaniasis, whereas elderly had a higher burden of Dengue Fever and Middle East Respiratory Syndrome. Although very few studies reported on socioeconomic differences in burden, the ones that reported showed higher burden of diseases among the disadvantaged socioeconomic groups such as the poor and the less educated. More than 80% studies reported an increase in burden over the years. CONCLUSION: The literature is scanty for most of the diseases reviewed and the number of studies from countries with humanitarian challenges is very low. The need for more nationally representative, population-based studies calls for prioritizing research investments.

Economic precarity, loneliness, and suicidal ideation during the COVID-19 pandemic.

The US population faced stressors associated with suicide brought on by the COVID-19 pandemic. Understanding the relationship between stressors and suicidal ideation in the context of the pandemic may inform policies and programs to prevent suicidality and suicide. We compared suicidal ideation between two cross-sectional, nationally representative surveys of adults in the United States: the 2017-2018 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) and the 2020 COVID-19 and Life Stressors Impact on Mental Health and Well-being (CLIMB) study (conducted March 31 to April 13). We estimated the association between stressors and suicidal ideation in bivariable and multivariable Poisson regression models with robust variance to generate unadjusted and adjusted prevalence ratios (PR and aPR). Suicidal ideation increased from 3.4% in the 2017-2018 NHANES to 16.3% in the 2020 CLIMB survey, and from 5.8% to 26.4% among participants in low-income households. In the multivariable model, difficulty paying rent (aPR: 1.5, 95% CI: 1.2-2.1) and feeling alone (aPR: 1.9, 95% CI: 1.5-2.4) were associated with suicidal ideation but job loss was not (aPR: 0.9, 95% CI: 0.6 to 1.2). Suicidal ideation increased by 12.9 percentage points and was almost 4.8 times higher during the COVID-19 pandemic. Suicidal ideation was more prevalent among people facing difficulty paying rent (31.5%), job loss (24.1%), and loneliness (25.1%), with each stressor associated with suicidal ideation in bivariable models. Difficulty paying rent and loneliness were most associated with suicidal ideation. Policies and programs to support people experiencing economic precarity and loneliness may contribute to suicide prevention.

State Firearm Laws and Firearm-Related Mortality and Morbidity.

This Viewpoint highlights the challenges to passing federal legislation that limits gun ownership and accessibility and summarizes some of the state laws used to successfully lower rates of firearm-related death and injury.

Pandemic preparedness and response: exploring the role of universal health coverage within the global health security architecture.

In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, several international initiatives have been developed to strengthen and reform the global architecture for pandemic preparedness and response, including proposals for a pandemic treaty, a Pandemic Fund, and mechanisms for equitable access to medical countermeasures. These initiatives seek to make use of crucial lessons gleaned from the ongoing pandemic by addressing gaps in health security and traditional public health functions. However, there has been insufficient consideration of the vital role of universal health coverage in sustainably mitigating outbreaks, and the importance of robust primary health care in equitably and efficiently safeguarding communities from future health threats. The international community should not repeat the mistakes of past health security efforts that ultimately contributed to the rapid spread of the COVID-19 pandemic and disproportionately affected vulnerable and marginalised populations, especially by overlooking the importance of coherent, multisectoral health systems. This Health Policy paper outlines major (although often neglected) gaps in pandemic preparedness and response, which are applicable to broader health emergency preparedness and response efforts, and identifies opportunities to reconceptualise health security by scaling up universal health coverage. We then offer a comprehensive set of recommendations to help inform the development of key pandemic preparedness and response proposals across three themes-governance, financing, and supporting initiatives. By identifying approaches that simultaneously strengthen health systems through global health security and universal health coverage, we aim to provide tangible solutions that equitably meet the needs of all communities while ensuring resilience to future pandemic threats.