Background: Mental health problems are prevalent among university students in Saudi Arabia. This study aimed to investigate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on university students’ mental health and sleep in Saudi Arabia. Method: A total of 582 undergraduate students from Saudi Arabia aged between 18 and 45 years old (M = 20.91, SD = 3.17) completed a cross-sectional online questionnaire measuring depression, anxiety, stress, resilience, and insomnia during the COVID-19 pandemic (2020). Analysis included an independent samples t-test, one-way ANOVA, and Hierarchical regression analysis. Results: Undergraduate students reported high levels of depression, anxiety, and perceived stress and low levels of resilience (p < 0.001) during the pandemic. In addition, students reported experiencing insomnia. A hierarchical regression analysis indicated that lower resilience, high levels of insomnia, having a pre-existing mental health condition, and learning difficulties (such as dyslexia, dyspraxia, or dyscalculia) were significantly associated with high levels of depression and stress. In addition, lower resilience, a high level of insomnia, and pre-existing mental health conditions were significantly associated with high levels of anxiety. Finally, a lower level of psychological resilience and a high level of insomnia were significantly associated with increased levels of depression, anxiety and stress within university students. Conclusion: This study has provided evidence that a lower level of psychological resilience and insomnia were associated with mental health problems among undergraduate students in Saudi Arabia, thus enhancing psychological resilience and interventions to support sleep and mental health are vital to support student well-being outcomes throughout the pandemic.

(see www.thecochranelibrary.com for information). Cochrane Reviews are regularly updated as new evidence emerges and in response to feedback, and the CDSR should be consulted for the most recent version of the review.To evaluate the effectiveness of psychosocial interventions for men with prostate cancer in improving quality of life (QoL), self-efficacy and knowledge and in reducing distress, uncertainty and depression. We searched for trials using a range of electronic databases including the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE and PsycINFO to October 2013, together with hand searching of journals and reference lists. Randomised controlled trials were eligible if they included psychosocial interventions that explicitly used one or a combination of the following approaches: cognitive behavioural, psychoeducational, supportive and counselling. Interventions had to be delivered or facilitated by trained or lay personnel. Our outcomes were an improvement in QoL, self-efficacy and knowledge and a reduction in distress, uncertainty and depression. Pairs of review authors independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias. We analysed data using standardised mean differences (SMDs), random-effects models and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). In all, 19 studies with a total of 3 204 men, with a diagnosis of prostate cancer, comparing psychosocial interventions vs usual care were included in this review. Men in the psychosocial intervention group had a small, statistically significant improvement in the physical component of general healthrelated QoL (GHQoL) at end of intervention (SMD 0.12, 95% CI 0.01-0.22) based on low quality evidence. There was no clear evidence of benefit associated with psychosocial interventions for the mental component of GHQoL at end of intervention (SMD À0.04, 95% CI À0.15 to 0.06) based on moderate quality evidence. At end of intervention, cancer-related QoL showed a small improvement after psychosocial interventions (SMD 0.21, 95% CI 0.04-0.39). For prostate cancer-specific and symptom-related QoL, the differences between intervention and control groups were not significant. There was no clear evidence that psychosocial interventions were beneficial in improving self-efficacy at end of intervention (SMD 0.16, 95% CI À0.05 to 0.38) based on very low quality evidence. Men in the psychosocial intervention group had a moderate increase in prostate cancer knowledge at end of intervention (SMD 0.51, 95% CI 0.32-0.71) based on very low quality evidence. A small increase in knowledge with psychosocial interventions was noted at 3 months after intervention (SMD 0.31, 95% CI 0.04-0.58). The results for uncertainty (SMD À0.05, 95% CI À0.35 to 0.26) and distress (SMD 0.02, 95% CI À0.11 to 0.15) at end of intervention were compatible with both benefit and harm based on very low quality evidence. Finally, there was no clear evidence of benefit associated with psychosocial interventions for depression at end of intervention (SMD À0.18, 95% CI À0.51 to 0.15) based on...

Social support, coping, and positive perceptions as potential protective factors for the well-being of mothers of children with intellectual and developmental disabilities.

There is variability in the extent to which mothers are affected by the behavior problems of their children with developmental disabilities (DD). We explore whether maternal resilience functions as a protective or compensatory factor. In Studies 1 and 2, using moderated multiple regression models, we found evidence that maternal resilience functioned as a compensatory factor-having a significant independent main effect relationship with well-being outcomes in mothers of children with DD and autism spectrum disorder. However, there was no longitudinal association between resilience and maternal well-being outcomes. There was little evidence of the role of resilience as a protective factor between child behavior problems and maternal well-being in both studies.

Background Resilience is a protective factor that emerges when individuals are faced with challenges and stressors. Multiple sclerosis (MS) is a chronic neurological disease that introduces a great deal of stress for the individual and his/her support partner. We designed a telehealth resilience-building dyadic program for persons with MS (PwMS) and their support partners. Objectives To evaluate the feasibility of the resilience intervention. The secondary objective was to assess the benefits of the intervention. Methods Sixty-two participants ( M = 49.5 years, 31 dyads of PwMS) and support partners) were recruited to participate. Out of the 31 dyads, 26 were spouses, 2 were cohabiting partners, and 3 were parent–child dyads. Results The feasibility goals of the intervention were met, as determined by high participant satisfaction and acceptable completion rates. Preliminary outcomes relating to resilience were positive, suggesting that this intervention had a positive impact on participants. Conclusions To the best of our knowledge, this is the first resilience-building intervention delivered via telehealth for both PwMS and their support partners. The study showed an increase in resilience-building skills for addressing the challenges faced by PwMS and their support partners. These skills can be promoted and taught, clinically supported by telehealth, an affordable, accessible healthcare solution. Trial Registration at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03555253).