No abstract

Schizophrenia is a heritable complex phenotype associated with a background risk involving multiple common genetic variants of small effect and a multitude of environmental exposures. Early twin and family studies using proxy‐genetic liability measures suggest gene‐environment interaction in the etiology of schizophrenia spectrum disorders, but the molecular evidence is scarce. Here, by analyzing the main and joint associations of polygenic risk score for schizophrenia (PRS‐SCZ) and environmental exposures in 1,699 patients with a diagnosis of schizophrenia spectrum disorders and 1,542 unrelated controls with no lifetime history of a diagnosis of those disorders, we provide further evidence for gene‐environment interaction in schizophrenia. Evidence was found for additive interaction of molecular genetic risk state for schizophrenia (binary mode of PRS‐SCZ above 75% of the control distribution) with the presence of lifetime regular cannabis use and exposure to early‐life adversities (sexual abuse, emotional abuse, emotional neglect, and bullying), but not with the presence of hearing impairment, season of birth (winter birth), and exposure to physical abuse or physical neglect in childhood. The sensitivity analyses replacing the a priori PRS‐SCZ at 75% with alternative cut‐points (50% and 25%) confirmed the additive interaction. Our results suggest that the etiopathogenesis of schizophrenia involves genetic underpinnings that act by making individuals more sensitive to the effects of some environmental exposures.

The COVID-19 pandemic and the lockdown restrictions could have adverse consequences for patients with severe mental disorders (SMD). Here, we aim to compare the early psychological impact (depression, anxiety, and stress responses, intrusive and avoidant thoughts, and coping strategies) on people with SMD ( n = 125) compared with two control groups: common mental disorders (CMD, n = 250) and healthy controls (HC, n = 250). An anonymous online questionnaire using a snowball sampling method was conducted from March 19–26, 2020 and included sociodemographic and clinical data along with the DASS-21 and IES scales. We performed descriptive and bivariate analyses and multinomial and linear regression models. People with SMD had higher anxiety, stress, and depression responses than HC, but lower scores than CMD in all domains. Most people with SMD (87.2%) were able to enjoy free time, although control groups had higher percentages. After controlling for confounding factors, anxiety was the only significant psychological domain with lower scores in HC than people with SMD (OR = 0.721; 95% CI: 0.579–0.898). In the SMD group, higher anxiety was associated with being single (beta = 0.144), having COVID-19 symptoms (beta = 0.146), and a higher score on the stress subscale of DASS-21 (beta = 0.538); whereas being able to enjoy free time was a protective factor (beta = −0.244). Our results showed that patients with SMD reacted to the pandemic and the lockdown restrictions with higher anxiety levels than the general public, and suggesting this domain could be a criterion for early intervention strategies and closer follow-up.

Background Epidemic outbreaks have significant impact on psychological well-being, increasing psychiatric morbidity among the population. We aimed to describe the early psychological impact of COVID-19 and its contributing factors in a large Spanish sample, globally and according to mental status (never mental disorder NMD, past mental disorder PMD, current mental disorder CMD). Methods An online questionnaire was conducted between 19 and 26 March, five days after the official declaration of alarm and the lockdown order. Data included sociodemographic and clinical information and the DASS-21 and IES questionnaires. We analysed 21 207 responses using the appropriate descriptive and univariate tests as well as binary logistic regression to identify psychological risk and protective factors. Results We found a statistically significant gradient in the psychological impact experienced in five domains according to mental status, with the NMD group being the least affected and the CMD group being the most affected. In the three groups, the depressive response was the most prevalent (NMD = 40.9%, PMD = 51.9%, CMD = 74.4%, F = 1011.459, P < 0.001). Risk factors were female sex and classification as a case in any psychological domain. Protective factors were younger age and ability to enjoy free time. Variables related to COVID-19 had almost no impact except for having COVID-19 symptoms, which was a risk factor for anxiety in all three groups. Conclusions Our results can help develop coping strategies addressing modifiable risk and protective factors for each mental status for early implementation in future outbreaks.

Introduction There are few published empirical data on the effects of COVID‐19 on mental health, and until now, there is no large international study. Material and methods During the COVID-19 pandemic, an online questionnaire gathered data from 55,589 participants from 40 countries (64.85% females aged 35.80 ± 13.61; 34.05% males aged 34.90±13.29 and 1.10% other aged 31.64±13.15). Distress and probable depression were identified with the use of a previously developed cut-off and algorithm respectively. Statistical analysis Descriptive statistics were calculated. Chi-square tests, multiple forward stepwise linear regression analyses and Factorial Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) tested relations among variables. Results Probable depression was detected in 17.80% and distress in 16.71%. A significant percentage reported a deterioration in mental state, family dynamics and everyday lifestyle. Persons with a history of mental disorders had higher rates of current depression (31.82% vs. 13.07%). At least half of participants were accepting (at least to a moderate degree) a non-bizarre conspiracy. The highest Relative Risk (RR) to develop depression was associated with history of Bipolar disorder and self-harm/attempts (RR = 5.88). Suicidality was not increased in persons without a history of any mental disorder. Based on these results a model was developed. Conclusions The final model revealed multiple vulnerabilities and an interplay leading from simple anxiety to probable depression and suicidality through distress. This could be of practical utility since many of these factors are modifiable. Future research and interventions should specifically focus on them.

No abstract

HIGHLIGHTS This study examined the early psychological correlates associated with the COVID-19 pandemic and lockdown in an older adult sample. Regardless of mental status, depressive and avoidant style were the most prevalent in this older adult sample. Interventions need to be tailored to alleviate dysfunctional coping strategies and their progression to mental illness.

To examine the prevalence of specific reasons for attempted suicide, factors associated with them, and whether reasons for attempted suicide influence risk of repetition. As part of the Monitoring Suicide in Europe (MONSUE) project, data on 4,683 suicide attempters from nine European countries were collected. Independence tests were used to study the influence of age, gender, and other factors on reported reasons. We examined risk of repetition using logistic regression analysis. Interpersonal conflict was common for all patients except those widowed, living alone, or retired. Mental health problems were prevalent among over 45 year-olds, patients unable to work, and patients with a history of at least three suicide attempts. Financial difficulties were cited more often by patients who were 45-64 years old, divorced or separated, living with children only, and unemployed. Close bereavement/serious illness and own physical illness were associated with those over 65 years of age. Two reasons for suicide attempt, interpersonal conflict and mental health problems, were associated with increased risk of repetition independent of other factors. Suicide attempters have a multitude of problems of varying prevalence depending on age, gender, and other factors. They present a range of clinical profiles that require a multidisciplinary response.