IntroductionOn 15 March 2019, a white supremacist gunman opened fire in two mosques in Christchurch, New Zealand, during Friday prayers, killing 51 people and injuring 40. The event was witnessed by at least 250 survivors and also live streamed on social media, leading to widespread and repeated exposure within the community. It is expected that survivors, families and community members will be at increased risk of developing mental disorders due to the scale and violence of these attacks.This protocol describes the first phase of a proposed longitudinal study to screen and assess the long-term impacts of the terrorist attack on members of the Christchurch Muslim community, to determine clinical need and facilitate access to appropriate interventions and to gain insights into working with such a traumatised, ethnically diverse population. It has been developed in close collaboration with members of that community.Methods and analysisA mixed-method design is described, combining self-report measures with a clinician-administered diagnostic interview. Participants include Christchurch Muslims aged 18 years and over, with a target sample size of n=200. Analyses will determine prevalence of major mental disorders, while regression analyses will model the relationship between pre-event features, trauma exposure and mental disorders. A small number of participants, stratified by exposure type, will also take part in a qualitative interview in English. All study information and self-report measures are provided in translations based on the ethnolinguistic composition of the group and are available in paper and online versions.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval was granted by the New Zealand Health and Disability Ethics Committee 19/NTA/147. All participants provide informed consent, either written or online via REDCap software. The study is registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry. Findings will be disseminated initially to the impacted community, then by publication in scientific journals, presentations and to government agencies.Trial registration numberACTRN12620000909921.

It is critical to understand the psychosocial impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on populations around the world. In this article, we highlight the key challenges associated with epidemiological psychosocial research in a disaster context and reflect on lessons learned from firsthand experience over the last decade in Christchurch, New Zealand, following the 2010/2011 Canterbury earthquakes and 2019 Mosque attacks. We make recommendations for study design to improve the quality of research evaluating the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic, the inclusion of positive outcome measures and the need to evaluate a range of cultural contexts. We hope that highlighting these areas will improve research and result in a better understanding of the psychosocial impacts of the pandemic.

Summary Cognitive screening tests are culture bound and have been shown to perform differently depending on the culture, even with adequate translation. Khan et al examine in detail ways in which the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) has been modified for different languages and cultures and produce a systematic guide for future modifications. However, questions arise regarding the availability of the MoCA. Other important issues in the transcultural use and modification of neuropsychiatric tests include providing a culturally safe context for testing, understanding the cultural context in which screening takes place and assessing other neuropsychiatric conditions, which may manifest differently in different cultural contexts and which affect cognition.

IntroductionThe COVID-19 pandemic exposed people to significant and prolonged stress. The psychosocial impacts of the pandemic have been well recognised and reported in high-income countries (HICs) but it is important to understand the unique challenges posed by COVID-19 in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) where limited international comparisons have been undertaken. This protocol was therefore devised to study the psychosocial impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic in seven LMICs using scales that had been designed for or translated for this purpose.Methods and analysisThis cross-sectional study uses an online survey to administer a novel COVID Psychosocial Impacts Scale (CPIS) alongside established measures of psychological distress, post-traumatic stress, well-being and post-traumatic growth in the appropriate language. Participants will include adults aged 18 years and above, recruited from Indonesia, Iraq, Iran, Malaysia, Pakistan, Somalia and Turkey, with a pragmatic target sample size of 500 in each country.Data will be analysed descriptively on sociodemographic and study variables. In addition, CPIS will be analysed psychometrically (for reliability and validity) to assess the suitability of use in a given context. Finally, within-subjects and between-subjects analyses will be carried out using multi-level mixed-effect models to examine associations between key sociodemographic and study variables.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval was granted by the Human Ethics Committee, University of Otago, New Zealand (Ref. No. 21/102). In addition, international collaborators obtained local authorisation or ethical approval in their respective host universities before data collection commenced.Participants will give informed consent before taking part. Data will be collected and stored securely on the University of Otago, New Zealand Qualtrics platform using an auto-generated non-identifiable letter-number string. Data will be available on reasonable request. Findings will be disseminated by publications in scientific journals and/or conference presentations.Trial registration numberNCT05052333.

This paper reports on the development and validation of the COVID Psychosocial Impacts Scale (CPIS), a self-report measure that comprehensively examines both positive and negative psychosocial impacts from the COVID-19 pandemic. This is the first part of the program of work in which the CPIS was administered and compared with a measure of psychological distress (Kessler Psychological Distress Scale, K-10) and wellbeing (World Health Organization Well-Being Index, WHO-5). The data were obtained online in 2020 and 2022 at two distinct time points to capture different exposures to the pandemic in the New Zealand population to a non-representative sample of 663 and 687 adults, respectively. Two hundred seventy-one participants took part in both surveys. Findings indicate a unidimensional structure within CPIS subscales and inter-relatedness among CPIS stress-related subscales. The scatter plots and correlation matrix indicate CPIS having a positive moderate correlation with K10 and a negative moderate correlation with WHO-5, indicative of construct validity. The paper outlines contextual factors surrounding CPIS development and makes suggestions for future iterations of CPIS. Further work will examine its psychometric properties across cultures.