Identification of methodological issues regarding direct impact indicators of COVID-19: a rapid scoping review on morbidity, severity and mortality.

BACKGROUND: During the first epidemic wave, COVID-19 surveillance focused on quantifying the magnitude and the escalation of a growing global health crisis. The scientific community first assessed risk through basic indicators, such as the number of cases or rates of new cases and deaths, and later began using other direct impact indicators to conduct more detailed analyses. We aimed at synthesizing the scientific community's contribution to assessing the direct impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on population health through indicators reported in research papers. METHODS: We conducted a rapid scoping review to identify and describe health indicators included in articles published between January 2020 and June 2021, using one strategy to search PubMed, EMBASE and WHO COVID-19 databases. Sixteen experts from European public health institutions screened papers and retrieved indicator characteristics. We also asked in an online survey how the health indicators were added to and used in policy documents in Europe. RESULTS: After reviewing 3891 records, we selected a final sample of 67 articles and 233 indicators. We identified 52 (22.3%) morbidity indicators from 33 articles, 105 severity indicators (45.1%, 27 articles) and 68 mortality indicators (29.2%, 51). Respondents from 22 countries completed 31 questionnaires, and the majority reported morbidity indicators (29, 93.5%), followed by mortality indicators (26, 83.9%). CONCLUSIONS: The indicators collated here might be useful to assess the impact of future pandemics. Therefore, their measurement should be standardized to allow for comparisons between settings, countries and different populations.

Beyond the Preventive Measures: A Delphi Method-Based Study of the Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on the Mental Health of Different Age Groups.

Background and Objectives: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) preventive measures affected various aspects of people's lives, while also representing an important risk factor for people's mental health. In the present study, we examined the negative psychological consequences of the preventive measures on people's mental health and the protective factors that strengthened their mental health and well-being during the pandemic. Materials and Methods: A study, using a combination of qualitative and quantitative methods based on a Delphi protocol, was conducted with a sample of Slovenian professionals who worked with people from different demographic groups (i.e., children and adolescents, emerging adults, the adult working population, the elderly) during the pandemic. We conducted (i) a qualitative study involving semi-structured interviews with 11 professionals and (ii) a quantitative study where 73 professionals completed a structured online questionnaire. Results: Experts recognized the disruption of informal face-to-face social contacts as the measure with the greatest impact on people's lives across all groups studied, the effect being particularly evident in relation to individuals' development period and socio-demographic characteristics. An individual's ability to adapt to change and emotional support provided by family or other close persons contributed significantly to maintaining mental health and well-being during the pandemic. Conclusions: Considering the interplay of various COVID-19-related risk and protective factors for mental health, enabling and promoting the maintenance and development of social relationships (including through alternative pathways) should be a priority aspect of (mental health) intervention for all demographic groups.

Evaluator's alignment as an important indicator of adequacy of the criteria and assessment procedure for recognizing the good practice in public health.

Background: Public health interventions aim to reduce the burden of chronic non-communicable diseases. Implementing evidence-based interventions that are proven to be successful and effective is widely recognized as the best approach to addressing public health challenges. To avoid the development and implementation of less effective or successful or even harmful practices, clear criteria for the assessment of practices, that consider different dimensions of the interventions in public health, are needed. The main aim of the research was to test our Criteria and assessment procedure for recognizing good practices in the field of public health by estimating the consistency between the evaluators and thereby gaining insight into the adequacy and reliability of the criteria as well as to check how the evaluators understand the criteria and methodology and if it is properly used in assessing the interventions. Methods: The assessment of the interventions took place from 2021 to 2022. The individual evaluator's scores on the scale from 1 to 5 for each specific sub-criterion were collected, which was followed by a panel discussion to reach a final score for each sub-criterion. The inter-rater agreement was measured using percent overall agreement and Fleiss' kappa coefficient. Results: We found moderate inter-rater agreement on the level of the assessment criteria group. The lowest agreement was observed for the effectiveness and efficiency sub-criteria group, which also received the lowest scores from the evaluators. Challenges identified with the scoring process were due to the descriptive 1 to 5 scale and the varying specificity of the criteria. Conclusion: The results showed that studying consistency between evaluators can highlight areas for improvement or adjustment in the assessment criteria and enhance the quality of the assessment instrument. Therefore, such analysis would be useful part of both newly and well-established health promotion and prevention program registries.

Suicide Methods in Slovenia - Characteristics andTime Trends 2001-2020.

Background: Between 2001 and 2020, Slovenia lost 8,952 lives due to suicides, two thirds of them by hanging. Aim: To analyze trends in suicide methods between 2001 and 2020 and to explore relationships between suicide methods and selected sociodemographic characteristic. Methods: We focused on methods accounting for 95.7% of all suicides. We performed joinpoint regression to examine changes in suicide rates by respective methods and multivariate logistic regression analyses to study sociodemographics associated with specific suicide methods. Results: A gender-specific annual decrease in suicide rates was observed in all methods except for sharp objects and jumping or lying in front of a moving object. Age was statistically significant in the use of firearms and jumping or lying in front of a moving object, while gender was significant in all methods. Associations were found between education, marital status, region of residence, and various suicide methods. Limitations: The results are potentially culturally specific. Conclusion: Certain sociodemographics seem to be associated with the selection of the method.

Coping with the mental health impact of COVID-19: A study protocol for a multinational longitudinal study on coping and resilience during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Mental health is challenged due to serious life events such as the COVID-19 pandemic and can differ by the level of resilience. National studies on mental health and resilience of individuals and communities during the pandemic provide heterogeneous results and more data on mental health outcomes and resilience trajectories are needed to better understand the impact of the pandemic on mental health in Europe. METHODS: COPERS (Coping with COVID-19 with Resilience Study) is an observational multinational longitudinal study conducted in eight European countries (Albania, Belgium, Germany, Italy, Lithuania, Romania, Serbia, and Slovenia). Recruitment of participants is based on convenience sampling and data are gathered through an online questionnaire. gathering data on depression, anxiety, stress-related symptoms suicidal ideation and resilience. Resilience is measured with the Brief Resilience Scale and with the Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale. Depression is measured with the Patient Health Questionnaire, Anxiety with the Generalized Anxiety Disorder Scale and stress-related symptoms with the Impact of Event Scale Revised- Suicidal ideation is assessed using item 9 of the PHQ-9. We also consider potential determinants and moderating factors for mental health conditions, including sociodemographic characteristics (e.g., age, gender), social environmental factors (e.g., loneliness, social capital) and coping strategies (e.g., Self-efficacy Belief). DISCUSSION: To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study to multi-nationally and longitudinally determine mental health outcomes and resilience trajectories in Europe during the COVID-19 pandemic. The results of this study will help to determine mental health conditions during the COVID-19 pandemic across Europe. The findings may benefit pandemic preparedness planning and future evidence-based mental health policies.

Positive mental health in Slovenia before and during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Background: Mental health has been heavily affected during the COVID-19 pandemic. In this study we compared the prevalence of flourishing and languishing mental health during the pandemic and examined which factors are associated with either category of positive mental health respectively. Methods: Data from two cross-sectional surveys with nationally representative samples of adult population in Slovenia conducted in 2019 (n = 9,047) and in 2021 (n = 3,429) are used. Positive mental health was measured with Mental Health Continuum-Short Form instrument. Logistic regression was used to examine the associations between flourishing and languishing mental health and relevant COVID-19 specific and other health-related factors. Results: There was a substantial decrease in the prevalence of flourishing and an increase in the prevalence of languishing mental health during the pandemic. Distribution of both flourishing and languishing mental health followed the socio-economic gradient. Resilience, COVID-19 literacy and changes in family relations, social interactions, and dietary habits were associated with both flourishing and languishing mental health. Conclusion: Positive mental health of the population worsened during the pandemic, more so in traditionally disadvantaged populations. Public health efforts need to be focused appropriately with an increased emphasis on strengthening resilience and health literacy.

Anticipated Self and Public Stigma in Suicide Prevention Professionals.

Background: Stigma about mental illness-both public and self-is one of the most important factors hindering help-seeking. Stigma can occur during an acute episode of mental illness or be anticipatory. One group affected by stigma, but often neglected, is mental health professionals. This study examined the anticipated form of mental-illness and help-seeking self-stigma and the anticipated form of public stigma of suicidal behavior among members of the International Association for Suicide Prevention. We hypothesized that suicidologists with a history of suicidality or mental illness would anticipate greater stigma from the public and self. Methods: The study received ethical approval from the Commission for Medical Ethics of the Republic of Slovenia. Data from 83 participants who completed an online survey (February to May 2020) with informed consent were analyzed using path analysis. We tested a model predicting help-seeking self-stigma based on (i) personal experience of mental illness using anticipated self-stigma of mental illness as a mediating variable and (ii) history of suicidal behavior using anticipated public stigma of suicidal behavior as a mediating variable. Results: Personal experience of mental illness predicted anticipation of self-stigma of mental illness (ß = 0.26). History of suicidality predicted anticipation of public stigma of suicidal behavior (ß = 0.29). Anticipated self-stigma of mental illness proved to be a stronger predictor of help-seeking self-stigma (ß = 0.40) than anticipated public stigma of suicidal behavior (ß = 0.07). Conclusions: It is important to intentionally support the mental health of suicide prevention professionals, as they are not immune to mental illness or various types of stigma. Because our sample was small and diverse, further research to better understand stigma concepts in this population is warranted.