The unpredictability and uncertainty of the COVID-19 pandemic; the associated lockdowns, physical distancing, and other containment strategies; and the resulting economic breakdown could increase the risk of mental health problems and exacerbate health inequalities. Preliminary findings suggest adverse mental health effects in previously healthy people and especially in people with pre-existing mental health disorders. Despite the heterogeneity of worldwide health systems, efforts have been made to adapt the delivery of mental health care to the demands of COVID-19. Mental health concerns have been addressed via the public mental health response and by adapting mental health services, mostly focusing on infection control, modifying access to diagnosis and treatment, ensuring continuity of care for mental health service users, and paying attention to new cases of mental ill health and populations at high risk of mental health problems. Sustainable adaptations of delivery systems for mental health care should be developed by experts, clinicians, and service users, and should be specifically designed to mitigate disparities in health-care provision. Thorough and continuous assessment of health and service-use outcomes in mental health clinical practice will be crucial for defining which practices should be further developed and which discontinued. For this Position Paper, an international group of clinicians, mental health experts, and users of mental health services has come together to reflect on the challenges for mental health that COVID-19 poses. The interconnectedness of the world made society vulnerable to this infection, but it also provides the infrastructure to address previous system failings by disseminating good practices that can result in sustained, efficient, and equitable delivery of mental health-care delivery. Thus, the COVID-19 pandemic could be an opportunity to improve mental health services.

SUMMARYBackground: A new generation of antipsychotics was introduced over a decade ago for the

In people suffering from schizophrenia, major areas of everyday life are impaired, including independent living, productive activities and social relationships. Enhanced understanding of factors that hinder real-life functioning is vital for treatments to translate into more positive outcomes. The goal of the present study was to identify predictors of real-life functioning in people with schizophrenia, and to assess their relative contribution. Based on previous literature and clinical experience, several factors were selected and grouped into three categories: illness-related variables, personal resources and context-related factors. Some of these variables were never investigated before in relationship with real-life functioning. In 921 patients with schizophrenia living in the community, we found that variables relevant to the disease, personal resources and social context explain 53.8% of real-life functioning variance in a structural equation model. Neurocognition exhibited the strongest, though indirect, association with real-life functioning. Positive symptoms and disorganization, as well as avolition, proved to have significant direct and indirect effects, while depression had no significant association and poor emotional expression was only indirectly and weakly related to real-life functioning. Availability of a disability pension and access to social and family incentives also showed a significant direct association with functioning. Social cognition, functional capacity, resilience, internalized stigma and engagement with mental health services served as mediators. The observed complex associations among investigated predictors, mediators and real-life functioning strongly suggest that integrated and personalized programs should be provided as standard treatment to people with schizophrenia.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

This electroencephalographic (EEG) study tested whether cortical EEG rhythms (especially delta and alpha) show a progressive increasing or decreasing trend across physiological aging. To this aim, we analyzed the type of correlation (linear and nonlinear) between cortical EEG rhythms and age. Resting eyes-closed EEG data were recorded in 108 young (Nyoung; age range: 18-50 years, mean age 27.3+/-7.3 SD) and 107 elderly (Nold; age range: 51-85 years, mean age 67.3+/-9.2 SD) subjects. The EEG rhythms of interest were delta (2-4 Hz), theta (4-8 Hz), alpha 1 (8-10.5 Hz), alpha 2 (10.5-13 Hz), beta 1 (13-20 Hz), and beta 2 (20-30 Hz). EEG cortical sources were estimated by low-resolution brain electromagnetic tomography (LORETA). Statistical results showed that delta sources in the occipital area had significantly less magnitude in Nold compared to Nyoung subjects. Similarly, alpha 1 and alpha 2 sources in the parietal, occipital, temporal, and limbic areas had significantly less magnitude in Nold compared to Nyoung subjects. These nine EEG sources were given as input for evaluating the type (linear, exponential, logarithmic, and power) of correlation with age. When subjects were considered as a single group there was a significant linear correlation of age with the magnitude of delta sources in the occipital area and of alpha 1 sources in occipital and limbic areas. The same was true for alpha 2 sources in the parietal, occipital, temporal, and limbic areas. In general, the EEG sources showing significant linear correlation with age also supported a nonlinear correlation with age. These results suggest that the occipital delta and posterior cortical alpha rhythms decrease in magnitude during physiological aging with both linear and nonlinear trends. In conclusion, this new methodological approach holds promise for the prediction of dementia in mild cognitive impairment by regional source rather than surface EEG data and by both linear and nonlinear predictors.

Negative symptoms have long been conceptualized as a core aspect of schizophrenia. They play a key role in the functional outcome of the disorder, and their management represents a significant unmet need. Improvements in definition, characterization, assessment instruments and experimental models are needed in order to foster research aimed at developing effective interventions. A consensus has recently been reached on the following aspects: a) five constructs should be considered as negative symptoms, i.e. blunted affect, alogia, anhedonia, asociality and avolition; b) for each construct, symptoms due to identifiable factors, such as medication effects, psychotic symptoms or depression, should be distinguished from those regarded as primary; c) the five constructs cluster in two factors, one including blunted affect and alogia and the other consisting of anhedonia, avolition and asociality. In this paper, for each construct, we report the current definition; highlight differences among the main assessment instruments; illustrate quantitative measures, if available, and their relationship with the evaluations based on rating scales; and describe correlates as well as experimental models. We conclude that: a) the assessment of the negative symptom dimension has recently improved, but even current expert consensus-based instruments diverge on several aspects; b) the use of objective measures might contribute to overcome uncertainties about the reliability of rating scales, but these measures require further investigation and validation; c) the boundaries with other illness components, in particular neurocognition and social cognition, are not well defined; and d) without further reducing the heterogeneity within the negative symptom dimension, attempts to develop successful interventions are likely to lead to great efforts paid back by small rewards.