No abstract

No abstract

Objective: We explored the experiences of academic mothers traversing the simultaneous demands of parenting and their professional roles throughout the pandemic to better understand the impact of COVID-19 on engagement in scholarship. Background: In response to reports of reduced scholarship by women across academic disciplines, the goal of this study was to understand the lived experiences of women scholars who identify as mothers. Method: Academic women, including faculty and students, completed an online survey with demographic items and open-ended questions. From the collected data, responses from participants who identified as mothers (n = 51) were analyzed using thematic analysis. Results: Analysis of the data revealed that participants' roles as parents and scholarly women were inextricably intertwined, each serving as foundational components of their identities, a reality highlighted by the exacerbating stressors associated with COVID-19. Altered childcare demands, conflicting roles, and relational changes emerged as consequences of the ongoing pandemic, which compromised participants' ability to effectively attend to different aspects of their identity and sometimes resulted in the development of negative emotions. Conclusion: Participants identified additional responsibilities due to the ongoing pandemic. Feeling pulled between their often-conflicting personal and professional identities, academic mothers cited a lack of supportive professional structures, which became more evident during COVID-19, as a barrier to their pursuit of scholarship. Implications: This study aligned with previous scholarly documentation of historical gendered bias common within academia. The potential long-term professional impact of

The goal of the German drug safety program in psychiatry AMSP (Arzneimittelsicherheit in der Psychiatrie) is the assessment of severe or new adverse drug reactions (ADRs). Here we report on 53,042 of 122,562 patients treated with antidepressants who were monitored from 1993 to 2000 in 35 psychiatric hospitals in German-speaking countries. The overall incidence of severe ADRs of antidepressants was 1.4 % of exposed patients; when only ADRs rated as probable or definite were considered, a rate of 0.9 % in patients treated with antidepressants was observed. ADR rates were higher for TCAs (imputed in 1.0 % of patients overall, respectively in 0.6 % of patients when only ADs were imputed) and lower for MAO inhibitors and SSRIs (0.7 % for both, respectively 0.3 % and 0.4 %). Within the TCA group there was a difference among clomipramine (2.1 %, respectively 1.0 %), amitriptyline (1.0 %, respectively 0.6 %), and doxepin or trimipramine (both 0.6 %, respectively 0.3 %). With regard to single SSRI, similar rates were observed for paroxetine (0.8 %, respectively 0.5 %) and for citalopram (0.7 %, respectively 0.4 %). Of the new dual-acting antidepressants, venlafaxine ranged at 0.9 %, (respectively 0.5 %) and mirtazapine at 0.6 % (respectively 0.5 %). In particular, TCAs were associated with known risks, such as toxic delirium, grand mal seizures, and hepatic (i. e., increased liver enzymes), urologic (i. e., urinary retention), allergic (i. e., exanthema), or cardiovascular (i. e., mainly orthostatic collapse) reactions. In SSRI-treated patients (non-delirious) psychic and neurological ADRs were most prominent, followed by gastrointestinal, dermatologic, and endocrinological/electrolyte reactions, with agitation, hyponatremia (probably as part of the SIADH syndrome and associated with severe neurologic or psychiatric symptoms in 64 % of all cases), increased liver enzymes, nausea, and the serotonin syndrome as leading unwanted symptoms. Venlafaxine (in the immediate-release formulation) was associated with adverse CNS and somatic symptoms such as severe agitation, diarrhea, increased liver enzymes, hypertension, and hyponatremia. Mirtazapine was mostly connected with increased liver enzymes, cutaneous edema, and collapse, but with no case of significant hyponatremia. For drugs that potently inhibit serotonin uptake, serum sodium concentration should be controlled when applied in high-dose therapy or in vulnerable patients.

Sexual dysfunction frequently occurs in psychiatric inpatients treated with antipsychotics. Our findings only partly support the assumptions concerning a major role of prolactin-increasing neuroleptics for medication-induced sexual impairment.

No abstract

Objective The purpose of this study was to explore how academic womxn experience their partnerships during quarantine and to determine the impact of those relational dynamics on scholarly productivity. Background Past literature indicates traumatic events and extended quarantine is associated with negative mental health outcomes. While primary partnerships serve as one protective factor, extended quarantine with one's partner introduces novel stress to a relationship, which may have unintended outcomes, including those that affect productivity. Method An online survey was provided to academic womxn invested in scholarship. Responses from participants who identified as in a relationship (n = 67) were coded using thematic analysis through a feminist lens. Findings Participants highlighted three major themes across their responses: time and space, communication, and needs. These findings reflected stressors typical within couple relationships but highlighted important considerations for partners of academic womxn in support of their scholarly activity during quarantine. Conclusion Though the flexibility available during the pandemic for academic womxn provided time and space for some to nurture their relationship as well as focus on scholar activity, this was not consistent across partners. Implications Findings show the mixed experiences of partners and confirm the importance of communication, especially about time and space and professional needs. Recommendations can be extrapolated to other processional and career partnerships.

Bringing our collective experiences of past collaborations through a virtual connection, we created an international research team of 16 multidiscipline, multicultural, and multilingual academic women called “COVID GAP” (Gendered Academic Productivity) to explore the ongoing challenges and effects of COVID-19. Identifying as insider researchers, we engaged in a two-phase, primarily qualitative research project to better understand the lived experiences of academics during the pandemic. Our past individual experiences with cooperative research informed our roles and responsibilities and how we organized and communicated. This article is a reflection of how COVID GAP has refined our collaborative process in response to an evolving comprehension of our own lessons learned including understanding the nature of cooperative research and that it takes time and effort. From our experience, we provide specific recommendations for group collaborations emphasizing the need to identify a team coordinator to organize efforts, the establishment of a safe and equitable working environment for all involved, and the explicit attention to building a network for research partnerships.