We found important differences between Brazilian and US medical students, particularly in mental health and wellness. These findings could be explained by a complex interaction between several factors, highlighting the importance of considering cultural and school-level influences on well-being.

Recent correspondence letters to the editor of this journal pointed out to the need of implementing psychological support during the pandemic and post-pandemic period to both general and frontline workers. Especially, they highlighted the importance of religious/spiritual interventions in order to provide an integral and holistic care. In this perspective, an important consequence of the social isolation is the closure of churches and the suspension of religious meetings in order to avoid agglomeration and contagion. However, although this is a very important approach in terms of public health, a question is raised: how to promote spiritual care and help spiritual/religious individuals to cope with their problems while maintaining compliance with social isolation? To address this question, we report the Spiritual Hotline Project, a project designed by many Brazilian healthcare workers intended to give spiritual and religious assistance to people with different cultural background. So far, the hotline was able to assist people from different parts of the world, including Brazil and Portugal as well as with different religious affiliation, in order to provide a spiritual comfort and care during this public health crisis.

IntroductionCOVID-19 may lead to persistent and potentially incapacitating clinical manifestations (post-acute sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 infection (PASC)). Using easy-to-apply questionnaires and scales (often by telephone interviewing), several studies evaluated samples of COVID-19 inpatients from 4 weeks to several months after discharge. However, studies conducting systematic multidisciplinary assessments of PASC manifestations are scarce, with thorough in-person objective evaluations restricted to modestly sized subsamples presenting greatest disease severity.Methods and analysesWe will conduct a prospective observational study of surviving individuals (above 18 years of age) from a cohort of over 3000 subjects with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 who were treated as inpatients at the largest academic health centre in Sao Paulo, Brazil (Hospital das Clínicas, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade de São Paulo). All eligible subjects will be consecutively invited to undergo a 1–2-day series of multidisciplinary assessments at 2 time-points, respectively, at 6–9 months and 12–15 months after discharge. Assessment schedules will include detailed multidomain questionnaires applied by medical research staff, self-report scales, objective evaluations of cardiopulmonary functioning, physical functionality and olfactory status, standardised neurological, psychiatric and cognitive examinations, as well as diagnostic laboratory, muscle ultrasound and chest imaging exams. Remaining material from blood tests will be incorporated by a local biobank for use in future investigations on inflammatory markers, genomics, transcriptomics, peptidomics and metabolomics.Ethics and disseminationAll components of this programme have been approved by local research ethics committees. We aim to provide insights into the frequency and severity of chronic/post-COVID multiorgan symptoms, as well as their interrelationships and associations with acute disease features, sociodemographic variables and environmental exposures. Findings will be disseminated in peer-reviewed journals and at scientific meetings. Additionally, we aim to provide a data repository to allow future pathophysiological investigations relating clinical PASC features to biomarker data extracted from blood samples.Trial registration numberRBR-8z7v5wc; Pre-results.

Background: Studies on "Spirituality, religion and health" (R/S) have been increasing worldwide, including in Brazil. Mapping this production can help researchers to understand this field and also to identify gaps in the Brazilian R/S studies. Objective: To analyze the Brazilian scientific articles on "Religion, Spirituality and Health" available on the main electronic databases using a bibliometric approach. Methods: A comprehensive review of four major databases (PubMed, Scopus, BVS and Web of Science) was conducted. Three reviewers performed the data analysis. Off-topic articles, articles from Portugal, books and thesis were excluded. Articles were then classified by: Publication year, journal, Central focus in R/S, Academic Area, Main topic and Study Type. Results: From 3,963 articles found, 686 studies were included in the final analysis (320 had central focus on R/S). There was an increase of articles in the last decade (most observational), with predominance of mental health issues, and from journals in the field of psychiatry, public health and nursing. Discussion: This study enabled us to widen our understanding about how the field of "spirituality, religion and health" has been established and how this field is increasing in Brazil. These findings can help in the development of future Brazilian studies.

The purpose of this study was to investigate the influence of spirituality, religiosity, personal beliefs, and previous contact with health issues on the level of empathy in medical students. Jefferson Scale of Empathy-Student Version, WHOQOL-Spirituality, Religiousness and Personal Beliefs, and Duke University Religion Index were applied to 285 Brazilian medical students. The findings suggest that meaning of life and previous mental health treatment but not Religiosity were positively related to empathy. We suggest that more attention should be given for prevention and treatment of mental health issues, and further studies are needed to understand and replicate these findings.

Objective The present study aims to investigate the occurrence of psychiatric and cognitive impairments in a cohort of survivors of moderate or severe forms of COVID-19. Method 425 adults were assessed 6 to 9 months after hospital discharge with a structured psychiatric interview, psychometric tests and a cognitive battery. A large, multidisciplinary, set of clinical data depicting the acute phase of the disease, along with relevant psychosocial variables, were used to predict psychiatric and cognitive outcomes using the ‘Least Absolute Shrinkage and Selection Operator’ (LASSO) method. Results Diagnoses of ‘depression’, ‘generalized anxiety disorder’ and ‘post-traumatic stress disorder’ were established respectively in 8%, 15.5% and 13.6% of the sample. After pandemic onset (i.e., within the previous year), the prevalence of ‘depression’ and ‘generalized anxiety disorder’ were 2.56% and 8.14%, respectively. Memory decline was subjectively reported by 51.1% of the patients. Psychiatric or cognitive outcomes were not associated with any clinical variables related to the severity of acute-phase disease, nor by disease-related psychosocial stressors. Conclusions This is the first study to access rates of psychiatric and cognitive morbidity in the long-term outcome after moderate or severe forms of COVID-19 using standardized measures. As a key finding, there was no significant association between clinical severity in the acute-phase of SARS-CoV-2 infection and the neuropsychiatric impairment 6 to 9 months thereafter.

BackgroundThe frequently observed stress of medical students worldwide leads them to have psychic suffering often leading to illness. Minor psychic disorders such as anxiety, depression and burnout, have a higher prevalence in these students than in the rest of random population. Different initiatives were tried to minimize the deleterious effects of the medical course and this article aims at showing the repercussions of a elective course that and was proposed as a possibility to help the students.MethodsA qualitative case study took place in a public Brazilian university as an elective discipline offered to medical students in 2013, offering coping strategies for professional stress. The data was collected through a semi-structured individual questionnaire that was anonymous, and given to students on the last day of the course, with 18 Likert scale questions about personal and behavioural changes observed after taking the course. Objective questions were asked about their perception of stress at the beginning and at the end of the course: the use of the coping strategies taught and the perception of the utility of the content. In addition, one open-ended question was asked about the meaning of the discipline to the students. The quantitative data was analysed with descriptive simple statistics and the qualitative with the support of the WebQDA software. The research project was approved by the ethics committee of the institution.ResultsThe results showed that the course contributed positively to the students’ academic life: 67 % reported less symptoms of stress at the end of the course; 76 % adopted new coping strategies; and 90 % considered that this learning activity was useful for identifying stressors and sharing them with colleagues.ConclusionsThe elective course produced benefits to the students, representing theoretical-practical learning and an opportunity for reflection and self-knowledge, which caused psychological, behavioural and lifestyle changes. It is recommended that further studies on this theme should be conducted.

Objective: To review the most common mental health strategies aimed at alleviating and/or preventing mental health problems in individuals during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and other coronavirus pandemics. Methods: We conducted a systematic review of the literature assessing three databases (PubMed, SCOPUS, and PsycINFO). A meta-analysis was performed with data from randomized controlled trials (RCTs). For non-RCT studies, a critical description of recommendations was performed. Results: From a total of 2,825 articles, 125 were included. Of those, three RCTs were included in the meta-analysis. The meta-analysis revealed that the interventions promoted better overall mental health outcomes as compared to control groups (standardized mean difference [SMD] = 0.87 [95%CI 0.33-1.41], p o 0.001, I 2 = 69.2%), but did not specifically improve anxiety (SMD = 0.98 [95%CI -0.17 to 2.13], p 4 0.05; I 2 = 36.8%). Concerning the systematic review, we found a large body of scientific literature proposing recommendations involving psychological/psychiatric interventions, self-care, education, governmental programs, and the use of technology and media. Conclusions: We found a large body of expert recommendations that may help health practitioners, institutional and governmental leaders, and the general population cope with mental health issues during a pandemic or a crisis period. However, most articles had a low level of evidence, stressing the need for more studies with better design (especially RCTs) investigating potential mental health interventions during COVID-19.