Media reporting on alcohol and other drugs in Australia and the Mindframe guidelines: Baseline data.

INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study was to generate a baseline database of print media reporting on alcohol and other drug (AOD) issues prior to the release of the Mindframe guidelines in March 2019. Specifically, to: (i) describe the content associated with media entries that focus on AOD use in Australian news media; (ii) determine how the media entries compare to several domains associated with recently developed Mindframe guidelines for publicly reporting on AOD; and (iii) identify content factors associated with different scores. METHODS: Media entries between July 2016 and June 2017 were searched for key AOD-related terms using the Australian and New Zealand Newsstream database. Two coding schemes were developed to rate a stratified sample of 50% of the media entries against the Mindframe guidelines. Associations between content and total comparison scores were determined using linear regression models. RESULTS: Detailed coding of the 2007 articles identified as relevant for the current study indicated that a majority (67%) were focused on one of three substances: alcohol, cannabis or methamphetamine. Most of the entries were either law enforcement (22%) or criminal justice related (19%). Entries that focused on methamphetamine scored significantly lower than entries on alcohol when compared to the Mindframe guidelines, similarly entries focused on crime/justice-related topics scored significantly lower than entries focused on positive outcomes. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: A disproportionate number of print media entries, particularly those related methamphetamine use, focused on crime or justice-related topics, potentially further contributing to stigma, and emphasising the legal consequences of AOD use.

The impact of the built environment on loneliness: A systematic review and narrative synthesis.

Loneliness is a pressing public health issue. Although quintessentially individual, it is shaped by wider environmental, cultural, socio-economic, and political circumstances. Using a systematic review methodology, this paper draws on interdisciplinary research to conceptualise the relationship between the built environment and loneliness. We present a narrative synthesis of 57 relevant studies to characterise the body of evidence and highlight specific built-environment elements. Our findings demonstrate the need for further conceptual and empirical explorations of the multifaceted ways in which built environments can prevent loneliness, supporting calls for investment into this public-health approach.

A hidden pandemic? An umbrella review of global evidence on mental health in the time of COVID-19.

Background: The mental health impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic remain a public health concern. High quality synthesis of extensive global literature is needed to quantify this impact and identify factors associated with adverse outcomes. Methods: We conducted a rigorous umbrella review with meta-review and present (a) pooled prevalence of probable depression, anxiety, stress, psychological distress, and post-traumatic stress, (b) standardised mean difference in probable depression and anxiety pre-versus-during the pandemic period, and (c) comprehensive narrative synthesis of factors associated with poorer outcomes. Databases searched included Scopus, Embase, PsycINFO, and MEDLINE dated to March 2022. Eligibility criteria included systematic reviews and/or meta-analyses, published post-November 2019, reporting data in English on mental health outcomes during the COVID-19 pandemic. Findings: Three hundred and thirty-eight systematic reviews were included, 158 of which incorporated meta-analyses. Meta-review prevalence of anxiety symptoms ranged from 24.4% (95%CI: 18-31%, I 2: 99.98%) for general populations to 41.1% (95%CI: 23-61%, I 2: 99.65%) in vulnerable populations. Prevalence of depressive symptoms ranged from 22.9% (95%CI: 17-30%, I 2: 99.99%) for general populations to 32.5% (95%CI: 17-52%, I 2: 99.35) in vulnerable populations. Prevalence of stress, psychological distress and PTSD/PTSS symptoms were 39.1% (95%CI: 34-44%; I 2: 99.91%), 44.2% (95%CI: 32-58%; I 2: 99.95%), and 18.8% (95%CI: 15-23%; I 2: 99.87%), respectively. Meta-review comparing pre-COVID-19 to during COVID-19 prevalence of probable depression and probable anxiety revealed standard mean differences of 0.20 (95%CI = 0.07-0.33) and 0.29 (95%CI = 0.12-0.45), respectively. Conclusion: This is the first meta-review to synthesise the longitudinal mental health impacts of the pandemic. Findings show that probable depression and anxiety were significantly higher than pre-COVID-19, and provide some evidence that that adolescents, pregnant and postpartum people, and those hospitalised with COVID-19 experienced heightened adverse mental health. Policymakers can modify future pandemic responses accordingly to mitigate the impact of such measures on public mental health.