No abstract

BackgroundAdvances in genetics and digital phenotyping in psychiatry have given rise to testing services targeting young people, which claim to predict psychiatric outcomes before difficulties emerge. These services raise several ethical challenges surrounding data sharing and information privacy.ObjectivesThis study aimed to investigate young people’s interest in predictive testing for mental health challenges and their attitudes towards sharing biological, psychosocial and digital data for such purpose.MethodsEighty UK adolescents aged 16–18 years took part in a digital role-play where they played the role of clients of a fictional predictive psychiatry company and chose what sources of personal data they wished to provide for a risk assessment. After the role-play, participants reflected on their choices during a peer-led interview.FindingsParticipants saw multiple benefits in predictive testing services, but were highly selective with regard to the type of data they were willing to share. Largely due to privacy concerns, digital data sources such as social media or Google search history were less likely to be shared than psychosocial and biological data, including school grades and one’s DNA. Participants were particularly reluctant to share social media data with schools (but less so with health systems).ConclusionsEmerging predictive psychiatric services are valued by young people; however, these services must consider privacy versus utility trade-offs from the perspective of different stakeholders, including adolescents.Clinical implicationsRespecting adolescents’ need for transparency, privacy and choice in the age of digital phenotyping is critical to the responsible implementation of predictive psychiatric services.

Practicing compassion has shown to reduce distress and increase emotional well-being in clinical and non-clinical populations. The existing research is primarily focused on Western populations although the concepts of compassion are heavily influenced by Asian Buddhist views. There is a dearth of compassion research conducted particularly in the Asian context. Therefore, this study aimed to explore the views and lived experiences of compassion in Sri Lankan students, to understand whether compassion is a socially embraced construct in Sri Lanka, considering that Sri Lanka is a Buddhist influenced society. Participants’ views and lived experiences of compassion towards themselves and to/from others were also investigated, with a specific focus on their perceived inhibitors and facilitators of compassion. Aims were set to identify whether Western compassion-based practices could be successfully applied to Asian societies such as Sri Lanka. An Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis approach was used to obtain and analyse qualitative data from a convenience sample of 10 Sri Lankan students, recruited from a Psychology course. The phenomenological analysis of the semi-structured face-to-face interviews elicited three predominant themes: What compassion means to me, what I make of it, and compassion through facilitators and inhibitors. The findings suggested that participants shared a similar understanding of the concept of compassion as reflected in the Western definitions. Experiences and views of compassion were shaped by several factors including religion, culture, society, and upbringing. In general, this study revealed that participants were well aware of the concept of compassion as well as its impact on their psychological well-being. Despite this, inhibitors existed in experiencing compassion. The religious and collectivistic-cultural influences need to be further explored and taken into account when implementing Western compassion-based practices to non-Western contexts such as Sri Lanka.

Background Practising compassion has shown to increase well-being and reduce distress in people across cultures. However, very little research has explored cultural differences in different facets of compassion with a dearth of research evident especially in the Asian context. Several inhibitors and facilitators of compassion have been identified although the nuances of cultural differences of these remain unexploited. This study aimed to discover cross-cultural similarities and differences of the levels of compassion, facilitators and inhibitors of compassion between Sri Lankan and UK people. Methods A cross-sectional, questionnaire-based quantitative research was conducted among 149 Sri Lankan and 300 UK participants. Individual predictors (such as fears of compassion, self-reassurance, external shame, social safeness and pleasure, depression and anxiety) were also explored in relation to compassion, compassion to others, and compassion from others in each group. Results The results indicated that Sri Lankan participants were more self-reassured and self-compassionate and self-identifying as a Buddhist predicted higher self-compassion, when compared to UK participants. However, Sri Lankan participants reported higher levels of external shame and fear of compassion not just towards themselves, but also towards and from others, indicating difficulty in engaging compassionately with others. In contrast, UK participants reported higher social safeness, indicating that they were more likely to feel safe and soothed by the society than the Sri Lankan participants. Conclusions Society plays a pivotal role in shaping one's experiences of compassion. This study suggests that specific cultural and social factors should be considered when implementing Western compassionate approaches to non-Western settings.

Practising compassion increases well-being and reduces depression, anxiety, and psychological distress among clinical and non-clinical populations. There is a rapid increase in compassion-based interventions within the past two decades. However, the reviews are limited to predominantly Western cultures. Therefore, this meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the literature attempting to promote and increase compassion in Asian communities. Method: Eight randomised controlled trials (RCTs) conducted between 2016 to 2021 were included in the metaanalysis with data from 1012 participants across Thailand, Japan, China and Hong Kong. Effect sizes were calculated to test the efficacy of the compassion-based interventions on the self-compassion outcome. Intervention efficacy was tested by comparing the intervention groups against control groups (wait-list control and active control groups) at preand post-interventions. Results: Significant between-group differences in change scores were found on self-report measures of self-compassion with large effect sizes in interventions with wait-list control groups (d = .86) and small effect sizes in interventions with active-control groups (d = .19).