Examining the Feasibility, Acceptability, and Effectiveness of Remote Training on Community-Based Participatory Research: Single-Arm Pre-Post Pilot Study.

BACKGROUND: Over the past decade, a growing body of scientific evidence has demonstrated that community engagement in research leads to more relevant research, enhances the uptake of research findings, and improves clinical outcomes. Despite the increasing need for the integration of community engagement methodologies into the scientific inquiry, doctoral and master's level competencies in the field of psychiatry often lack dedicated training or coursework on community engagement methodologies. OBJECTIVE: A total of 13 service users, peer support specialists, caregivers of people with mental health challenges, and scientists (with specialties ranging from basic science to implementation science) aged 18 and older participated in remote training on community-based participatory research. Data were collected at baseline, 2 days, and 3 months. METHODS: A total of 13 service users, peer support specialists, caregivers of people with mental health challenges, and scientists (with specialties ranging from basic science to implementation science) aged 18 and older participated in remote training on community-based participatory research. Data were collected at baseline, 2 days, and 3 months. RESULTS: The pilot study demonstrated that a 3-month remote training on community-based participatory research ("Partnership Academy") was deemed feasible and acceptable by service users, peer support specialists, caregivers of people with mental health challenges, and scientists. Improvements were found in research engagement and the quality of partnership. A marked increase in distrust in the medical system was also found. Groups submitted 4 grant applications and published 1 peer-reviewed journal at a 3-month follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: This pre- and postpilot study demonstrated it is possible to train groups of service users, peer support specialists, caregivers of people with mental health challenges, and scientists in community-based participatory research. These findings provide preliminary evidence that a 3-month remote training on community-based participatory research ("Partnership Academy") is feasible, acceptable, and potentially associated with improvements in research engagement as well as the quality of partnership and output, such as manuscripts and grant applications.

Cannabis legalization and driving under the influence of cannabis and driving under the influence of alcohol among adult and adolescent drivers in Ontario, Canada (2001-2019).

BACKGROUND: The impacts of cannabis legalization on driving under the influence of cannabis and driving under the influence of alcohol among adults and adolescents were examined in Ontario, Canada. METHODS: Data were sourced from adult (N=38,479) and adolescent (N=23,216) populations-based surveys (2001-2019). The associations between cannabis legalization and driving within an hour of using cannabis and driving within an hour of drinking two or more drinks of alcohol were quantified using logistic regression, with testing of multiplicative interactions between cannabis legalization and age and sex. All analyses were conducted separately for adults and adolescents and restricted to participants with a valid driver's license. RESULTS: Cannabis legalization was not associated with driving within an hour of using cannabis among adults (OR, 95% CI: 1.21, 0.69-2.11). However, a multiplicative interaction indicated that there was an increased likelihood of driving within an hour of using cannabis among adults ≥55 years of age (4.23, 1.85-9.71) pre-post cannabis legalization. Cannabis legalization was not associated with driving within an hour of using cannabis among adolescents (0.92, 0.72-1.16), or with driving within an hour of consuming two or more drinks of alcohol among adults (0.78, 0.51-1.20) or adolescents (0.87, 0.42-1.82). CONCLUSIONS: An increased likelihood of driving under the influence of cannabis among adults ≥55 years of age was detected in the year following cannabis legalization, suggesting the need for greater public awareness and education and police monitoring and enforcement concerning driving under the influence of cannabis, particularly among older adults.

The mental health impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic among individuals with depressive, anxiety, and stressor-related disorders: A scoping review.

OBJECTIVE: A scoping review of studies published in the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic focused on individuals with pre-existing symptoms of depression, anxiety, and specified stressor-related disorders, with the objective of mapping the research conducted. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: (1) direct study of individuals with pre-existing depressive, anxiety, and/or specified stressor-related (i.e., posttraumatic stress, acute stress) disorders/issues; (2) focus on mental health-related pandemic effects, and; (3) direct study of mental health symptoms related to depression, anxiety, or psychological distress. SOURCES OF EVIDENCE: Database-specific subject headings and natural language keywords were searched in Medline, Embase, APA PsycInfo, and Cumulative Index to Nursing & Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) up to March 3, 2021. Review of potentially relevant studies was conducted by two independent reviewers and proceeded in two stages: (1) title and abstract review, and; (2) full paper review. DATA CHARTING: Study details (i.e., location, design and methodology, sample or population, outcome measures, and key findings) were extracted from included studies by one reviewer and confirmed by the Principal Investigator. RESULTS: 66 relevant articles from 26 countries were identified. Most studies adopted a cross-sectional design and were conducted via online survey. About half relied on general population samples, with the remainder assessing special populations, primarily mental health patients. The most commonly reported pre-existing category of disorders or symptoms was depression, followed closely by anxiety. Most studies included depressive and anxiety symptoms as outcome measures and demonstrated increased vulnerability to mental health symptoms among individuals with a pre-existing mental health issue. CONCLUSION: These findings suggest that improved mental health supports are needed during the pandemic and point to future research needs, including reviews of other diagnostic categories and reviews of research published in subsequent years of the pandemic.

Stakeholders' views and opinions on existing guidelines on "How to Choose Mental Health Apps".

Background: Mental health Applications (Mhealth Apps) can change how healthcare is delivered. However, very little is known about the efficacy of Mhealth Apps. Currently, only minimum guidance is available in Assessment and Evaluation Tools (AETs). Therefore, this project aims to understand AET developers' perspectives and end users' experiences and opinions on "how to choose a Mhealth App". Objective: The primary objectives were: (1) obtaining stakeholder's opinions and experiences of development and use of AETs for Mhealth Apps, their weaknesses and strengths, and barriers in their implementation of Mhealth Apps; (2) the experiences of App users, their analyzation and, obstacles in the use of apps; and (3) to quantify themes related to choosing a Mhealth App. Methods: This qualitative study, used a sampling method to recruit six stakeholders (one App developer, two AET developers, an individual with lived experience of mental health illness, and two physicians) who were interviewed using a topic guide. These were examined by researchers (CT, WK, & FN) using thematic content analysis. Additionally, an anonymous online survey of 107 individuals was conducted. Findings: Our analyses revealed six main themes: (a) needs and opportunities; (b) views on Mhealth apps; (c) views & opinions on AETs; (d) implementation barriers; (e) system of evaluation and; (f) future directions. The first key concept was, all stakeholders agreed that Apps could significantly impact mental health and that end-users were unaware of mental health AETs and Apps. Secondly, due to commercial interests, end-users reliability of App evaluations requires clear conflict-free guidelines. Thirdly, AETs should be evaluated and developed through a rigorous methodology. Finally, stakeholders shared insights into future developments for AETs and Mhealth Apps. Additionally, online survey respondents chose a "health professional" as their preferred source of guidance in selecting a Mhealth app (84%) and best suited to develop guidelines (70%). Conclusion: The interviews and survey highlight the need for Mhealth Apps to be regulated and the importance of health professionals' engagement in the implementation process. Similarly, without well-defined roles for App evaluations within the health care system, it is unlikely that AETs will have wider spread use and impact without risk.

Comparison of mental health symptoms before and during the covid-19 pandemic: evidence from a systematic review and meta-analysis of 134 cohorts.

OBJECTIVE: To synthesise results of mental health outcomes in cohorts before and during the covid-19 pandemic. DESIGN: Systematic review. DATA SOURCES: Medline, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Embase, Web of Science, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang, medRxiv, and Open Science Framework Preprints. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES: Studies comparing general mental health, anxiety symptoms, or depression symptoms assessed from 1 January 2020 or later with outcomes collected from 1 January 2018 to 31 December 2019 in any population, and comprising ≥90% of the same participants before and during the covid-19 pandemic or using statistical methods to account for missing data. Restricted maximum likelihood random effects meta-analyses (worse covid-19 outcomes representing positive change) were performed. Risk of bias was assessed using an adapted Joanna Briggs Institute Checklist for Prevalence Studies. RESULTS: As of 11 April 2022, 94 411 unique titles and abstracts including 137 unique studies from 134 cohorts were reviewed. Most of the studies were from high income (n=105, 77%) or upper middle income (n=28, 20%) countries. Among general population studies, no changes were found for general mental health (standardised mean difference (SMD)change 0.11, 95% confidence interval -0.00 to 0.22) or anxiety symptoms (0.05, -0.04 to 0.13), but depression symptoms worsened minimally (0.12, 0.01 to 0.24). Among women or female participants, general mental health (0.22, 0.08 to 0.35), anxiety symptoms (0.20, 0.12 to 0.29), and depression symptoms (0.22, 0.05 to 0.40) worsened by minimal to small amounts. In 27 other analyses across outcome domains among subgroups other than women or female participants, five analyses suggested that symptoms worsened by minimal or small amounts, and two suggested minimal or small improvements. No other subgroup experienced changes across all outcome domains. In three studies with data from March to April 2020 and late 2020, symptoms were unchanged from pre-covid-19 levels at both assessments or increased initially then returned to pre-covid-19 levels. Substantial heterogeneity and risk of bias were present across analyses. CONCLUSIONS: High risk of bias in many studies and substantial heterogeneity suggest caution in interpreting results. Nonetheless, most symptom change estimates for general mental health, anxiety symptoms, and depression symptoms were close to zero and not statistically significant, and significant changes were of minimal to small magnitudes. Small negative changes occurred for women or female participants in all domains. The authors will update the results of this systematic review as more evidence accrues, with study results posted online (https://www.depressd.ca/covid-19-mental-health). REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42020179703.

Community-Based Mental Health and Substance Use Services for People Leaving Prison: Equity and Inclusion Strengths and Limitations in Specialized Service Inventory Development.

Community reentry from prison is a challenging process, especially for persons with lived and living experience of mental health concerns. Access to appropriate community-based care for those leaving prison is a key part of improving health equity for this population. Our work to develop a cross-Canada inventory of active community mental health and substance use services for criminal justice-involved persons represents a valuable example for others hoping to conduct projects that are similar in nature and scope. We describe the strengths and limitations of our health equity-informed, multi-pronged approach to service inventory development, highlighting the importance of considering and addressing search- and stakeholder-related biases. Investment of time and resources is critical to ensuring comprehensive and inclusive identification of community-based mental health services and meaningful resource development.

Advancing Curriculum Development and Design in Health Professions Education: A Health Equity and Inclusion Framework for Education Programs.

ABSTRACT: The COVID-19 pandemic has exacerbated pre-existing health inequities in vulnerable and marginalized patient populations. Continuing professional development (CPD) can be a critical driver of change to improve quality of care, health inequities, and system change. In order for CPD to address these disparities in care for patient populations most affected in the health care system, CPD programs must first address issues of equity and inclusion in their education development and delivery. Despite the need for equitable and inclusive CPD programs, there remains a paucity of tools and frameworks available in the literature to guide CPD and broader education providers on how best to develop and deliver equitable and inclusive education programs. In this article, we describe the development and application of a Health Equity and Inclusion (HEI) Framework for education and training grounded in the Analyze, Design, Develop, Implement, and Evaluate model for instructional design. Using a case example, specifically a hospital-wide trauma-informed de-escalation for safety program, we demonstrate how the HEI Framework can be applied practically to CPD programs to support equity and inclusion in the planning, development, implementation, and evaluation phases of education program delivery. The case example illustrates how the HEI Framework can be used by CPD providers to respect learner diversity, improve accessibility for all learners, foster inclusion, and address biases and stereotypes. We suggest that the HEI Framework can serve as an educational resource for CPD providers and health professions educators aiming to create equitable and inclusive CPD programs.

COVID-19 behavior determinants dataset.

The COVID-19 Behavior Determinants Database (http://covid19-database.com) is a research project that examined the sociodemographic and psychological determinants of COVID-19 related attitudes and behaviors. It is a comprehensive web-based survey that was administered to adults ages 18 or older (total n=8070) from the United States of America (n = 5326), including the four most populous states, specifically New York, California, Florida, and Texas, and Canada (n = 2744), including all provinces, except Quebec. The survey was collected at three timepoints, May 2020 (n=1019), July 2020 (n=4027), and March 2021 (n=3024). Participants provided detailed sociodemographic information and completed a battery of psychological assessments. Participants also provided information about prior testing for COVID-19 and perceived seriousness of COVID-19 and the need for current physical (social) distancing restrictions. The database is helpful to researchers and public health policy decision-makers who are interested in investigating and identifying the determinants of COVID-19 related attitudes and behaviors in North America.

Telephone-based cognitive behavioural therapy for patients with postoperative bariatric surgery to manage COVID-19 pandemic-related mental health issues and distress (TELE-BARICARE): a protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: Bariatric surgery is currently the most effective treatment for obesity, and is performed yearly in over 8000 patients in Canada. Over 50% of those who live with obesity also have a history of mental health disorder. The COVID-19 pandemic has made it difficult for people living with obesity to manage their weight even after undergoing bariatric surgery, which combined with pandemic-related increases in mental health distress, has the potential to adversely impact obesity outcomes such as weight loss and quality of life. Reviews of virtual mental health interventions during COVID-19 have not identified any interventions that specifically address psychological distress or disordered eating in patients with obesity, including those who have had bariatric surgery. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A randomised controlled trial will be conducted with 140 patients across four Ontario Bariatric Centres of Excellence to examine the efficacy of a telephone-based cognitive behavioural therapy intervention versus a control intervention (online COVID-19 self-help resources) in postoperative bariatric patients experiencing disordered eating and/or psychological distress. Patients will be randomised 1:1 to either group. Changes in the Binge Eating Scale and the Patient Health Questionnaire 9-Item Scale will be examined between groups across time (primary outcomes). Qualitative exit interviews will be conducted, and data will be used to inform future adaptations of the intervention to meet patients' diverse needs during and post-pandemic. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study has received ethics approvals from the following: Clinical Trials Ontario (3957) and the University Health Network Research Ethics Committee (22-5145), the Board of Record. All participants will provide written informed consent prior to enrolling in the study. Results will be made available to patients with bariatric surgery, the funders, the supporting organisations and other researchers via publication in peer-reviewed journals and conference presentations. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT05258578.

Systematic review of mental health symptom changes by sex or gender in early-COVID-19 compared to pre-pandemic.

Women and gender-diverse individuals have faced disproportionate socioeconomic burden during COVID-19. There have been reports of greater negative mental health changes compared to men based on cross-sectional research that has not accounted for pre-COVID-19 differences. We compared mental health changes from pre-COVID-19 to during COVID-19 by sex or gender. MEDLINE (Ovid), PsycINFO (Ovid), CINAHL (EBSCO), EMBASE (Ovid), Web of Science Core Collection: Citation Indexes, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang, medRxiv (preprints), and Open Science Framework Preprints (preprint server aggregator) were searched to August 30, 2021. Eligible studies included mental health symptom change data by sex or gender. 12 studies (10 unique cohorts) were included, all of which reported dichotomized sex or gender data. 9 cohorts reported results from March to June 2020, and 2 of these also reported on September or November to December 2020. One cohort included data pre-November 2020 data but did not provide dates. Continuous symptom change differences were not statistically significant for depression (standardized mean difference [SMD] = 0.12, 95% CI -0.09-0.33; 4 studies, 4,475 participants; I2 = 69.0%) and stress (SMD = - 0.10, 95% CI -0.21-0.01; 4 studies, 1,533 participants; I2 = 0.0%), but anxiety (SMD = 0.15, 95% CI 0.07-0.22; 4 studies, 4,344 participants; I2 = 3.0%) and general mental health (SMD = 0.15, 95% CI 0.12-0.18; 3 studies, 15,692 participants; I2 = 0.0%) worsened more among females/women than males/men. There were no significant differences in changes in proportions above cut-offs: anxiety (difference = - 0.05, 95% CI - 0.20-0.11; 1 study, 217 participants), depression (difference = 0.12, 95% CI -0.03-0.28; 1 study, 217 participants), general mental health (difference = - 0.03, 95% CI - 0.09-0.04; 3 studies, 18,985 participants; I2 = 94.0%), stress (difference = 0.04, 95% CI - 0.10-0.17; 1 study, 217 participants). Mental health outcomes did not differ or were worse by small amounts among women than men during early COVID-19.

Effects of mental health interventions among people hospitalized with COVID-19 infection: A systematic review of randomized controlled trials.

OBJECTIVE: We evaluated the effects of mental health interventions among people hospitalized with COVID-19. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review and searched 9 databases (2 Chinese-language) from December 31, 2019 to June 28, 2021. Eligible randomized controlled trials assessed interventions among hospitalized COVID-19 patients that targeted mental health symptoms. Due to the poor quality of trials, we sought to verify accuracy of trial reports including results. RESULTS: We identified 47 randomized controlled trials from China (N = 42), Iran (N = 4) and Turkey (N = 1) of which 21 tested the efficacy of psychological interventions, 5 physical and breathing exercises, and 21 a combination of interventions. Trial information could only be verified for 3 trials of psychological interventions (cognitive behavioral, guided imagery, multicomponent online), and these were the only trials with low risk of bias on at least 4 of 7 domains. Results could not be pooled or interpreted with confidence due to the degree of poor reporting and trial quality, the frequency of what were deemed implausibly large effects, and heterogeneity. CONCLUSION: Trials of interventions to address mental health in hospitalized COVID-19 patients, collectively, are not of sufficient quality to inform practice. Health care providers should refer to existing expert recommendations and standard hospital-based practices. REGISTRATION: PROSPERO (CRD42020179703); registered on April 17, 2020.

Effects of COVID-19 Mental Health Interventions Among Children, Adolescents, and Adults Not Quarantined or Undergoing Treatment Due to COVID-19 Infection: A Systematic Review of Randomised Controlled Trials.

OBJECTIVES: Our objective was to assess the effects of mental health interventions for children, adolescents, and adults not quarantined or undergoing treatment due to COVID-19 infection. METHODS: We searched 9 databases (2 Chinese-language) from December 31, 2019, to March 22, 2021. We included randomised controlled trials of interventions to address COVID-19 mental health challenges among people not hospitalised or quarantined due to COVID-19 infection. We synthesized results descriptively due to substantial heterogeneity of populations and interventions and risk of bias concerns. RESULTS: We identified 9 eligible trials, including 3 well-conducted, well-reported trials that tested interventions designed specifically for COVID-19 mental health challenges, plus 6 other trials with high risk of bias and reporting concerns, all of which tested standard interventions (e.g., individual or group therapy, expressive writing, mindfulness recordings) minimally adapted or not specifically adapted for COVID-19. Among the 3 well-conducted and reported trials, 1 (N = 670) found that a self-guided, internet-based cognitive-behavioural intervention targeting dysfunctional COVID-19 worry significantly reduced COVID-19 anxiety (standardized mean difference [SMD] 0.74, 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.58 to 0.90) and depression symptoms (SMD 0.38, 95% CI, 0.22 to 0.55) in Swedish general population participants. A lay-delivered telephone intervention for homebound older adults in the United States (N = 240) and a peer-moderated education and support intervention for people with a rare autoimmune condition from 12 countries (N = 172) significantly improved anxiety (SMD 0.35, 95% CI, 0.09 to 0.60; SMD 0.31, 95% CI, 0.03 to 0.58) and depressive symptoms (SMD 0.31, 95% CI, 0.05 to 0.56; SMD 0.31, 95% CI, 0.07 to 0.55) 6-week post-intervention, but these were not significant immediately post-intervention. No trials in children or adolescents were identified. CONCLUSIONS: Interventions that adapt evidence-based strategies for feasible delivery may be effective to address mental health in COVID-19. More well-conducted trials, including for children and adolescents, are needed.

Addressing the complex substance use and mental health needs of people leaving prison: Insights from developing a national inventory of services in Canada.

Internationally, transitions from prison to the community are often precarious experiences for people who are living with substance use and mental health concerns. In Canada, a continuing opioid overdose crisis and overlapping challenges related to the COVID-19 pandemic have generated urgency for scaling up community-based services that can meet the complex substance use and mental health needs of people leaving prison. In this commentary, we reflect on our experience with and knowledge gained by developing a national inventory of substance use and mental health services for criminal justice-involved persons who are re-entering the community. We learned that there is a scarcity of such community-based services specific to criminal justice-involved populations and a glaring lack of information about culturally safe and appropriate supports. Stakeholders from organisations across Canada identified that communities need a comprehensive array of low-barrier services, inclusive of harm reduction and substance use treatment services, to meet the diverse needs of people leaving prison. We recommend building greater investment in and awareness of community-driven, local programs, as well as enhancing efforts to engage people with lived and living experience in service design and provision. We also briefly describe a few programs to highlight examples of how to operationalise the themes that we observed to emerge while developing a national inventory of community-based substance use and mental health services for criminal justice-involved persons.

Determinants of social distancing adherence.

Introduction: Governments and public health authorities across many jurisdictions implemented social (physical) distancing measures to contain the spread of the 2019 novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19). Adherence to these measures is variable and likely influenced by various factors. This study aimed to 1) identify the individual sociodemographic, COVID-19 and social distancing related, and psychological determinants of social distancing adherence, and 2) explore regional differences in social distancing adherence in the United States (U.S.) and English-speaking Canada based on each region's discrepant response to social distancing restrictions. Methods: A web-based repeated cross-sectional survey was conducted in 4,942 English-speaking participants from the four most populous U.S. states, specifically New York, California, Texas, and Florida, and Canada (www.covid19-database.com). The study was conducted at two timepoints, from May 1 to 5, 2020 (n = 1,019, Canadian participants only) and from July 6 to 10, 2020 (n = 3,923). Separate univariate models were computed for individual sociodemographic, COVID-19 and social distancing related, and psychological determinants of social distancing adherence. To determine the total variance explained, a univariate analysis including all of the determinants was performed. Regional differences in social distancing were compared between the four U.S. states and Canada, and between the U.S. as a whole and Canada. Results: Adherence to social distancing was higher in May (mean = 4.4/5.0±0.7) compared to July (mean = 4.3/5.0±0.7) [t (4940) = 6.96, p < 0.001], likely a reflection of relaxing restrictions. There were no regional differences in adherence. Sociodemographic, COVID-19 and social distancing related, and psychological determinants explained 10, 36, and 23% of the variance of social distancing adherence, respectively. Higher perceived seriousness of COVID-19 [ß (SE) = 0.39 (0.01), p < 0.001, partial η2 = 0.22], lower risk propensity [ß (SE) = -0.15 (0.01), p < 0.001, partial η2 = 0.06], germ aversion [ß (SE) = 0.12 (0.01), p < 0.001, partial η2 = 0.03], age [ß (SE) = 0.01 (0.00), p < 0.001, partial η2 = 0.02], and greater social support [ß (SE) = 0.03 (0.00), p < 0.001, partial η2 = 0.02] had the largest effects on social distancing adherence. Conclusion: Public service initiatives to emphasize the serious consequences of infection and targeted interventions toward certain sociodemographic groups, such as younger adults and vulnerable individuals in greater need of social support, may help enhance the public's adherence to social distancing measures during subsequent waves of COVID-19 and future pandemics.

Vaccine Hesitancy Is a Barrier to Achieving Equitable Herd Immunity Among Racial Minorities.

Introduction: Racial minority groups have been disproportionately affected by the 2019 novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19). Vaccine hesitancy may be a major barrier to achieving equitable herd immunity and must be addressed to reduce the excess morbidity and mortality of COVID-19 in disproportionately affected communities. This study aimed to determine if COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy, and its factors vaccine complacency and confidence, are more prominent among disproportionately affected racial minority groups. Methods:We collected data from participants aged 18 years or older from the four most populous U.S. states, including New York, California, Florida, and Texas, and Canada. Data were collected using a web-based survey platform. Data are available at http://www.covid19-database.com. Results:Data from 4,434 participants were included [mean (SD) age = 48.7 (17.2) and 50.4% women]. Vaccine hesitancy was higher in Black, Indigenous (Native American and Indigenous People of Canada, including First Nations, Inuit and Métis), and Latinx compared to White participants, while no difference was found between East Asian and White participants. The group differences in vaccine hesitancy for Indigenous and Black compared to White participants remained after controlling for sociodemographic factors. Determinants of vaccine complacency were equivalent between disproportionately affected racial groups and white participants. Vaccine confidence (i.e., trust in vaccine benefit) was generally lower in all racial groups compared to White participants. Differences in vaccine mistrust comparing Black and East Asian to White participants remained after controlling for sociodemographic factors. Discussion:Disproportionately affected racial minorities may have higher vaccine hesitancy and lower confidence in COVID-19 vaccines. Public health and other relevant government services should address vaccine hesitancy among racial minorities using a culturally sensitive, community-centered approach to attain equitable herd immunity.

Online personalized feedback intervention to reduce risky cannabis use. Randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Given the widespread use of cannabis, and the concomitant risks associated with the drug, there is a need to increase the availability of interventions designed to reduce risky cannabis use. One promising intervention in the addictions employs personalized normative feedback to motivate change. METHODS: A two-arm randomized controlled trial (RCT) was conducted in which participants who used cannabis in a risky fashion were randomly assigned to one of two groups - those who received an online personalized feedback report in addition to educational materials about risky cannabis use and those who just received the online educational materials. Follow-up assessment occurred at three- and six-months post-randomization. Outcome variables included: number of days cannabis was used in the past 30, risky cannabis use (ASSIST score of four or more), and participant estimates of the proportion of cannabis users among those of the same age and gender. RESULTS: A total of 744 participants with risky cannabis use were recruited for the trial using online advertisements. There were no significant differences between intervention and educational materials only groups at three- and six-month follow-ups for the outcome variables, number of days used cannabis in the last 30 (p = 0.927) and proportion of participants engaging in risky cannabis use (p = 0.557). At three and six month follow-ups, participants who received the feedback intervention were more likely than those in the educational materials group to estimate that a larger proportion of people their age and gender did not use cannabis in the last year (p = 0.028). DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: While there was some evidence that the personalized feedback intervention modified normative perceptions about cannabis use, there did not appear to be support for the prediction that the intervention reduced cannabis consumption.

Individual determinants of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy.

BACKGROUND: Novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine hesitancy is a barrier to achieving herd immunity, and thus, a prominent public health concern. This study aimed to identify the determinants of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy based on the World Health Organization's '3Cs' model (i.e., confidence, complacency, and convenience) in the United States (U.S.) and Canada. METHODS: Data from 7678 adults ages 18 or older were collected from the four most populous U.S. States, specifically New York, California, Florida, and Texas, and from English-speaking Canada at three timepoints, in May and July 2020, and March 2021 using a web-based survey (www.covid19-database.com). Sociodemographic information was collected, and comprehensive psychological assessments were administered. Univariate analyses were performed to identify the individual determinants of vaccine hesitancy, which were categorized as: 1) vaccine confidence, 2) vaccine complacency, 3) sociodemographic, and 4) other psychological factors. A series of models were computed using these categorizations. RESULTS: Mistrust of vaccine benefit (ß(SE) = 0.67(0.01), p<0.001, partial η2 = 0.26) and lower perceived seriousness of COVID-19 (ß(SE) = 0.68(0.02), p<0.001, partial η2 = 0.12) were the principal determinants of vaccine hesitancy. Right-wing political affiliation (ß(SE) = 0.32(0.02), p<0.001, partial η2 = 0.03), higher risk propensity (ß(SE) = 0.24(0.02), p<0.001, partial η2 = 0.03), and less negative mental health effects of the COVID-19 pandemic (ß(SE) = 0.20(0.01), p<0.001, partial η2 = 0.03) were the main sociodemographic and psychological determinants. Other sociodemographic determinants included younger age, women, race, and employment status. Lack of vaccine confidence and complacency explained 38% and 21% of the variance in vaccine hesitancy, respectively; whereas, sociodemographic and psychological determinants explained 13% and 11% of the variance in vaccine hesitancy, respectively. DISCUSSION: Targeted and tailored public health interventions that enhance the public's confidence in vaccines and emphasize the risk and seriousness of COVID-19 may address COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy. Efforts directed toward specific marginalized and underserved groups may be required to promote vaccine confidence.

Nature-Based Equity: An Assessment of the Public Health Impacts of Green Infrastructure in Ontario Canada.

The built environment is a physical determinant of health essential to the planning and development of a more equitable society. Communities face growing challenges due to environmental stressors such as climate change, with vulnerable communities experiencing a disproportionate burden of adverse health outcomes. The interdependencies between urban planning and public health outcomes are inextricable, with respect to improving access to healthier built environments for vulnerable and marginalized groups. Widespread implementation of nature-based solutions, such as green infrastructure, provides a multi-functional strategy to support sustainable development, increase climate resilience, enhance ecological connectivity, and create healthier communities. A Health Equity Impact Assessment presents the findings of a participatory research study utilizing key informant interviews of public health unit professionals (eight) and a survey of green infrastructure volunteers and workers (36) on the impact of green infrastructure on individual and community mental and physical well-being, service use, and perceived unmet needs, using Ontario, Canada as a case study. Study findings indicate that where green infrastructure is both productive and publicly accessible, the benefits were significant for vulnerable populations. These benefits include increased social connectivity, skills development, and food security. Green infrastructure could be a viable strategy to address environmental stressors, improve health equity, and support localization of the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).

Benefits of Digital Health Resources for Substance Use Concerns in Women: Scoping Review.

BACKGROUND: Digital health resources are being increasingly used to support women with substance use concerns. Although empirical research has demonstrated that these resources have promise, the available evidence for their benefit in women requires further investigation. Evidence supports the capacity of interventions that are sex-, gender-, and trauma-informed to improve treatment access and outcomes and to reduce health system challenges and disparities. Indeed, both sex- and gender-specific approaches are critical to improve health and gender equity. Violence and trauma are frequent among those with substance use concerns, but they disproportionately affect those who identify as female or women, further underscoring the need for trauma-informed care as well. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this investigation was to evaluate the evidence supporting the efficacy or effectiveness of online or mobile interventions for risky or harmful substance use in adults who identify as female or women, or who report a history of trauma. METHODS: This scoping review is based on an academic search in MEDLINE, APA PsycINFO, Embase, Cochrane Central, and CINAHL, as well as a grey literature search in US and Canadian government and funding agency websites. Of the 7807 records identified, 465 remained following title and abstract screening. Of these, 159 met all eligibility criteria and were reviewed and synthesized. RESULTS: The 159 records reflected 141 distinct studies and 125 distinct interventions. Investigations and the interventions evaluated predominantly focused on alcohol use or general substance use. Evaluated digital health resources included multisession and brief-session interventions, with a wide range of therapeutic elements. Multisession online and mobile interventions exhibited beneficial effects in 86.1% (105/122) of studies. Single-session interventions similarly demonstrated beneficial effects in 64.2% (43/67) of study conditions. Most investigations did not assess gender identity or conduct sex- or gender-based analyses. Only 13 investigations that included trauma were identified. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the overall promise of digital health interventions for substance use concerns, direct or quantitative evidence on the efficacy or effectiveness of interventions in females or women specifically is weak.

Digital Interventions to Support Population Mental Health in Canada During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Rapid Review.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in a number of negative health related consequences, including impacts on mental health. More than 22% of Canadians reported that they had felt depressed in the last week, in response to a December 2020 national survey. Given the need to physically distance during the pandemic, and the increase in demand for mental health services, digital interventions that support mental health and wellness may be beneficial. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this research was to identify digital interventions that could be used to support the mental health of the Canadian general population during the COVID-19 pandemic. The objectives were to identify (1) the populations these interventions were developed for, inclusive of exploring areas of equity such as socioeconomic status, sex/gender, race/ethnicity and culture, and relevance to Indigenous peoples and communities; (2) the effect of the interventions; and (3) any barriers or facilitators to the use of the intervention. METHODS: This study was completed using a Cochrane Rapid Review methodology. A search of Embase, PsycInfo, Medline, and Web of Science, along with Google, Million Short, and popular mobile app libraries, was conducted. Two screeners were involved in applying inclusion criteria using Covidence software. Academic articles and mobile apps identified were screened using the Standard Quality Assessment Criteria for Evaluating Primary Research Papers from a Variety of Fields resource, the American Psychiatric Association App Evaluation Framework, and the Mental Health Commission of Canada's guidance on app assessment and selection. RESULTS: A total of 31 mobile apps and 114 web-based resources (eg, telemedicine, virtual peer support groups, discussion forums, etc) that could be used to support the mental health of the Canadian population during the pandemic were identified. These resources have been listed on a publicly available website along with search tags that may help an individual make a suitable selection. Variability exists in the populations that the interventions were developed for, and little assessment has been done with regard to areas of equity. The effect of the interventions was not reported for all those identified in this synthesis; however, for those that did report the effect, it was shown that they were effective in the context that they were used. A number of barriers and facilitators to using these interventions were identified, such as access, cost, and connectivity. CONCLUSIONS: A number of digital interventions that could support population mental health in Canada during the global COVID-19 pandemic were identified, indicating that individuals have several options to choose from. These interventions vary in their purpose, approach, design, cost, and targeted user group. While some research and digital interventions addressed equity-related considerations, more research and focused attention should be given to this area.