Depression in people living with HIV (PLWH) has become an urgent issue and has attracted the attention of both physicians and epidemiologists. Currently, 39% of HIV patients are reported to suffer from depression. This population is more likely to experience worsening disease states and, thus, poorer health outcomes. In this study, we analyzed research growth and current understandings of depression among HIV-infected individuals. The number of papers and their impacts have been considerably grown in recent years, and a total of 4872 publications published from 1990–2017 were retrieved from the Web of Science database. Research landscapes related to this research field include risk behaviors and attributable causes of depression in HIV population, effects of depression on health outcomes of PLWH, and interventions and health services for these particular subjects. We identified a lack of empirical studies in countries where PLWH face a high risk of depression, and a modest level of interest in biomedical research. By demonstrating these research patterns, highlighting the research gaps and putting forward implications, this study provides a basis for future studies and interventions in addressing the critical issue of HIV epidemics.

BackgroundAutomatic processes, such as attentional biases or interpretative biases, have been purported to be responsible for several psychiatric disorders. Recent reviews have highlighted that cognitive biases may be modifiable. Advances in eHealth and mHealth have been harnessed for the delivery of cognitive bias modification. While several studies have evaluated mHealth-based bias modification intervention, no review, to our knowledge, has synthesized the evidence for it. In addition, no review has looked at commercial apps and their functionalities and methods of bias modification. A review is essential in determining whether scientifically validated apps are available commercially and the proportion of commercial apps that have been evaluated scientifically.ObjectiveThe objective of this review was primarily to determine the proportion of attention or cognitive bias modification apps that have been evaluated scientifically and secondarily to determine whether the scientifically evaluated apps were commercially available. We also sought to identify commercially available bias modification apps and determine the functionalities of these apps, the methods used for attention or cognitive bias modification, and whether these apps had been evaluated scientifically.MethodsTo identify apps in the published literature, we searched PubMed, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and Scopus for studies published from 2000 to April 17, 2018. The search terms used were “attention bias” OR “cognitive bias” AND “smartphone” OR “smartphone application” OR “smartphone app” OR “mobile phones” OR “mobile application” OR mobile app” OR “personal digital assistant.” To identify commercial apps, we conducted a manual cross-sectional search between September 15 and 25, 2017 in the Apple iTunes and Google Play app stores. The search terms used to identify the apps were “attention bias” and “cognitive bias.” We also conducted a manual search on the apps with published evaluations.ResultsThe effectiveness of bias modification was reported in 7 of 8 trials that we identified in the published literature. Only 1 of the 8 previously evaluated apps was commercially available. The 17 commercial apps we identified tended to use either an attention visual search or gamified task. Only 1 commercial app had been evaluated in the published literature.ConclusionsThis is perhaps the first review to synthesize the evidence for published mHealth attention bias apps. Our review demonstrated that evidence for mHealth attention bias apps is inconclusive, and quite a few commercial apps have not been validated scientifically.

Background: Methadone maintenance treatment (MMT) has been proven to be effective in treating opioid dependence. In Vietnam, MMT services are provided primarily by public clinics, with only one private MMT clinic established in recent years. Assessing the preferences of patients for different MMT models is important in evaluating the feasibility of these models. This study measured the preferences of drug users enrolling in public and private MMT clinics in Vietnam and examines the related factors of these preferences. Methods: A cross-sectional study was performed on 395 participants at 3 methadone clinics in Nam Dinh. Data about the preferences for MMT models and sociodemographic characteristics of participants were collected. Exploratory factor analysis was employed to explore the construct validity of the questionnaire. The chi-square test and Mann-Whitney test were used for analyzing demographic characteristics and preferences of participants. Multivariate logistic regression identified factors associated with participants' preferences. Results: Half the participants received MMT treatment in a private facility (49.4%). Two preference dimensions were defined as "Availability and convenience of service" and "Competencies of clinic and health professionals". Selfemployed patients were more likely to consider these two dimensions when choosing MMT models. Only 9.9% of participants chose "Privacy" as one of the evaluation criteria for an MMT facility. Compared to public clinics, a statistically higher percentage of patients in the private clinic chose the attitudes of health workers as the reason for using MMT service (34.7% and 7.6% respectively). Mean score of satisfaction towards MMT services was 8.6 (SD = 1.0), and this score was statistically higher in a public facility, compared to the private facility (8.7 and 8.4 respectively). Conclusions: The study highlighted patterns of patient preferences towards MMT clinics. Compared to the public MMT model, the private MMT model may need to enhance their services to improve patient satisfaction.

BackgroundAutomatic biases, such as attentional biases and avoidance and interpretative biases, have been purported to be responsible for several psychiatric disorders. Gamification has been considered for cognitive bias modification, mainly to address the core issues of diminishing motivation to train over time, as bias modification intervention tasks tend to be highly repetitive. While a prior review has suggested how gamification strategies could be applied to such tasks, there remains a lack of systematic evaluation of gamified cognitive bias modification interventions in the literature.ObjectiveThe objective of this review is to understand the overall effectiveness of a gamified approach for cognitive bias modification and inform future research that seeks to integrate gamification technologies into existing conventional bias modification interventions.MethodsTo identify the relevant articles for our review, the following search terminologies were used: (“cognitive bias” OR “attention bias” OR “interpret* bias” OR “approach bias” OR “avoidance bias”) AND (“training” OR “modification” OR “practice” OR “therapy”) AND (“gamification” OR “game elements” OR “game” OR “gaming” OR “game mechanics”). PubMed, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and Scopus databases were searched systematically for articles published after 2000. Articles were included if they described a gamified cognitive bias modification task and included participants with underlying psychopathological symptoms. Data were systematically extracted from the identified articles, and a qualitative synthesis was performed.ResultsFour studies evaluated gamified cognitive bias modification interventions. Two studies included participants with anxiety symptoms, one with affective symptoms, and one with alcohol problems. The conventional visual probe task paradigm was used in 3 studies, and the attentional visual search task paradigm was used in the last study. We found gaming elements incorporated to include that of animations, sounds, feedback, and a point-scoring system for response time and difficulty. Of the 4 identified studies, only 2 reported their gamified interventions to be effective.ConclusionsOur review is the first to systematically synthesize the evidence for gamified cognitive bias modification interventions. The results arising from our review should be considered in the future design and conceptualization of gamified cognitive bias modification interventions.International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID)RR2-10.2196/10154

BackgroundConventional psychology therapies are unable to address automatic biases that result in individuals relapsing into their substance use disorder. Advances in experimental psychology have led to a better understanding of attention and approach biases and methods to modify these biases. Several studies have demonstrated the effectiveness of bias modification among clinical cohorts. The advances in mobile health technologies have allowed remote delivery of these interventions. To date, there is a lack of studies examining bias modification in a substance-using non-Western sample.ObjectiveThis study was designed to determine the feasibility of an attention bias modification intervention and an attention bias modification smartphone app for the reduction of attention biases among treatment-seeking individuals. The secondary aim is to determine the acceptability of the intervention.MethodsA feasibility study was conducted among inpatients who were in their rehabilitation phase at the National Addictions Management Service. Participants were to complete a set of baseline questionnaires, and on each day that they are in the study, undertake an attention bias assessment and modification task while completing a visual analogue scale to assess their craving. Feasibility was determined by the acceptance rate of participation and participants’ adherence to the interventions. Acceptability was assessed by a perception questionnaire. Descriptive statistical analyses were performed using SPSS version 22. A thematic analysis approach was used in the qualitative synthesis of users’ perceptions.ResultsOf the 40 participants invited to participate in the feasibility study, 10 declined, yielding an acceptance rate of 75%. Of the recruited participants, 6 participants were diagnosed with alcohol dependence; 17, with opioid dependence; 2, with cannabis dependence; and 5, with stimulant dependence. In addition, of the final 30 participants, 11 (37%) failed to complete all the planned interventions and 22 (73%) completed the perspective questionnaires; of these 22 participants, 100% rated the app as extremely and very easy, 77% rated it as extremely or very interactive, 54% rated it as extremely or very motivating, and 33% reported a change in their confidence levels.ConclusionsOur results highlight the feasibility of recruiting participants to undertake attention bias modification interventions. Participants generally accept use of a mobile version of such an intervention. Nevertheless, our acceptability data indicate that there could be improvements in the existing app, and a participatory design approach might be helpful in its future conceptualization.International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID)RR2-10.2196/11822

BackgroundCognitive biases refer to automatic attentional or interpretational tendencies, which result in individuals with addictive disorders to automatically attend to substance-related stimuli and those with anxiety disorders to attend to threatening stimuli. To date, several studies have examined the efficacy of cognitive bias modification, and meta-analytical studies have synthesized the evidence for overall efficacy. The clinical utility of cognitive bias modification interventions has previously been limited to the confines of a laboratory, but recent advances in Web technologies can change this.ObjectiveThis scoping review aimed to determine the scope of Web-based cognitive bias interventions and highlight their effectiveness.MethodsDatabases (PubMed and MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, ScienceDirect, and Cochrane Central) were searched from inception to December 5, 2017. The following search terminologies were used: (“attention bias” OR “cognitive bias” OR “approach bias” OR “avoidance bias” OR “interpretative bias”) AND (“Internet” OR “Web” OR “Online”). The methods for this scoping review are based on the previously published protocol. For the synthesis of the evidence, a narrative synthesis was undertaken, as a meta-analysis was not appropriate, given the lack of reported effect sizes and the heterogeneity in the outcomes reported.ResultsOf the 2674 unique articles identified, we identified 22 randomized controlled studies that met our inclusion criteria: alcohol use disorder (n=2), tobacco use disorder (n=2), depressive disorder (n=3), anxiety and depressive symptoms in adolescents (n=3), obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD; n=2), social anxiety disorder (n=9), and anxiety disorder (n=1). The sample sizes of these studies ranged from 16 to 434 participants. There is preliminary evidence to suggest that Web-based interventions could reduce biases among adolescents with heightened symptoms of anxiety and depression and among individuals with OCD.ConclusionsThis is the first scoping review that mapped out the scope of cognitive bias modification interventions for psychiatric disorders. Web-based interventions have been applied predominantly for social anxiety and addictive disorders. Larger cohorts must be used in future studies to better determine the effectiveness of Web-based cognitive bias interventions.International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID)RR1-10.2196/10427

Background: Opiates, cannabis, and stimulants are highly abused and are prevalent disorders. Psychological interventions are crucial given that they help individuals maintain abstinence following a lapse or relapse into substance use. The dual-process theory has posited that while the repeated use of a substance leads to increased automatic processing and increased automatic tendencies to approach substance-specific cues, in addition to the inhibition of other normal cognitive processes. Prior reviews are limited, as they failed to include trials involving participants with these prevalent addictive disorders or have not reviewed the published literature extensively.Objectives: The primary aim of this review is to synthesize the evidence for cognitive biases in opioid use, cannabis use, and stimulant use disorders. The secondary aim of the review is to determine if cognitive bias could be consistently detected using the different methods. Lastly, this review will narratively synthesize the evidence of possible associations between cognitive biases and other addiction-related outcomes.Methods: A search was conducted from November 2017 to January 2018 on PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, Science Direct, Cochrane Central, and Scopus. Articles were included if participants had a primary diagnosis of opioid use, cannabis use, or stimulant use disorder. The selection process of the articles was in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines. A qualitative synthesis was undertaken.Results: A total of 38 studies were identified. The main finding is the evidence that cognitive biases are present in the 38 studies identified, except for a single study on opioid use and stimulant use disorders. Cognitive biases were reported despite a variety of different methods being utilized. Synthesis of secondary outcome was not feasible, due to the varied outcomes reported.Conclusions: Cognitive biases have been consistently observed in opioid use, cannabis use, and stimulant use disorders, despite a range of assessment tools being utilized in the assessment for these biases.

Our present findings suggest that an acute course of ECT is effective in schizophrenia and may have cognitive benefits for some patients.