Relationship Between Severity and Length of Exposure to COVID-19 Parameters and Resulting Government Responses and the Suicide Crisis Syndrome (SCS).

OBJECTIVE: The COVID-19 pandemic has had a globally devastating psychosocial impact. A detailed understanding of the mental health implications of this worldwide crisis is critical for successful mitigation of and preparation for future pandemics. Using a large international sample, we investigated in the present study the relationship between multiple COVID-19 parameters (both disease characteristics and government responses) and the incidence of the suicide crisis syndrome (SCS), an acute negative affect state associated with near-term suicidal behavior. METHODS: Data were collected from 5528 adults across 10 different countries in an anonymous web-based survey between June 2020 and January 2021. RESULTS: Individuals scoring above the SCS cut-off lived in countries with higher peak daily cases and deaths during the first wave of the pandemic. Additionally, the longer participants had been exposed to markers of pandemic severity (eg, lockdowns), the more likely they were to screen positive for the SCS. Findings reflected both country-to-country comparisons and individual variation within the pooled sample. CONCLUSION: Both the pandemic itself and the government interventions utilized to contain the spread appear to be associated with suicide risk. Public policy should include efforts to mitigate the mental health impact of current and future global disasters.

Intentions to use mental health and suicide prevention resources among individuals with symptoms of the suicide crisis syndrome and/or suicidal ideation.

INTRODUCTION: The suicide crisis syndrome (SCS) has demonstrated efficacy in predicting suicide attempts, showing potential utility in detecting at-risk individuals who may not be willing to disclose suicidal ideation (SI). The present international study examined differences in intentions to utilize mental health and suicide prevention resources among community-based adults with varying suicide risk (i.e., presence/absence of SCS and/or SI). METHODS: A sample of 16,934 community-based adults from 13 countries completed measures about the SCS and SI. Mental health and suicide prevention resources were provided to all participants, who indicated their intentions to use these resources. RESULTS: Individuals with SCS (55.7%) were just as likely as those with SI alone (54.0%), and more likely than those with no suicide-related symptoms (45.7%), to report willingness to utilize mental health resources. Those with SI (both with and without SCS) were more likely to seek suicide prevention resources (52.6% and 50.5%, respectively) than those without SI (41.7% and 41.8%); however, when examining endorsements for personal use, those with SCS (21.6%) were more likely to use resources than individuals not at risk (15.1%). CONCLUSIONS: These findings provide insight into individuals' willingness to use resources across configurations of explicitly disclosed (SI) and indirect (SCS) suicide risk.

A Study of Oddity in a Russian Clinical Sample.

Background: At the beginning of 20th century, the phenomenon of oddity began to be studied. It was defined as a set of characteristics responsible for an individual giving the impression of being unusual, odd, and peculiar. Later, psychiatrists integrated oddity into the concept of schizotypy. Yet, while considered a part of the schizotypy construct, oddity has remained singular and maintained its status as an independent dimension. Objective: The present article discusses oddity as a set of particular clinical traits that can be evaluated both by self-report measures and clinical assessment. We set out to investigate the oddity phenomena as manifested in a clinical sample, in order to delineate key features that constitute this concept. Design: Seventy-one patients were selected according to a specific set of criteria and subjected to a set of self-report measures (the Schizotypal Personality Questionnaire and the Adult Personality Traits Questionnaire), a clinical interview, and a pathopsychological experiment. A number of cognitive, behavioral, and emotional characteristics were analyzed. An intra-group comparison was carried out in order to clarify the potential differences between the self-reported and clinically assessed phenomenon of oddity. Results: The study's first finding was that the SPQ-74 does not identify odd personalities in the general population, as reflected in the fact that the sample's average scores proved to be low. Secondly, restricted emotionality and a deficit in social interactions proved to be the prevalent characteristics of the sample of "odd" individuals. Furthermore, a set of certain speech peculiarities (word coinage, bizarrerie, etc.) and thinking impairments of various types (distortion of abstraction level and motivational deficit) emerged as prominent characteristics in the majority of subjects. Finally, it was determined that clinical assessment allows for a more comprehensive evaluation of the psychology of odd personalities than self-report measures, due to a number of the personality, temperamental, and cognitive characteristics that the latter tend to exhibit. Conclusions: "Odd" individuals can be characterized by a number of cognitive, emotional, and behavioral features independent of social perception and relevant to clinical practice; they can be captured more successfully by the application of qualitative methods. Further research is needed to elaborate this set of traits and test this hypothesis on new samples.