Social determinants associated with psychological distress in children and adolescents during and after the first COVID-19-related lockdown in France: results from the CONFEADO study.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to analyze the parental socio-demographic characteristics of children and adolescents aged 9 to 18 years old, as well as the living and housing conditions associated with the psychological distress in these two sub-populations during and after France's first national COVID-19-related lockdown in spring 2020. METHODS: We used data from the cross-sectional, observational, web-based study CONFEADO, which collected data on children and adolescents' living and housing conditions and socio-demographic characteristics as well as those of their parents. It also collected data on children's and adolescents' health behaviors and psychological distress. We assessed psychological distress using the 10-item Children and Adolescents Psychological Distress Scale (CAPDS-10), and performed a multinomial logistic regression. RESULTS: A total of 2882 children and adolescents were included in the present study. Factors associated with moderate psychological distress included being a female, parental financial difficulties, a lack of a private living space at home for the child/adolescent, and the following child health behaviors: no leisure or recreational activities with adults in the household, doing less than one hour of school homework a day, and not going outside during the lockdown. Severe psychological distress was associated with the parent's occupation (especially essential frontline workers), a lack of a private living space at home for the child/adolescent, and the following child health behaviors: spending over 5 h a day on social media, doing less than one hour of school homework a day, and no leisure or recreational activities with adults in the household. CONCLUSIONS: This study emphasizes the impact of housing and living conditions, as well as parents' socio-economic characteristics on children's health behaviors and psychological needs during the first COVID-19-related lockdown in France. Our results suggest that health policies implemented during future pandemics should consider these structural social determinants to prevent severe psychological distress in children and adolescents.

Characteristics of persons who died by suicide in prison in France: 2017-2018.

BACKGROUND: In northern countries, suicide rates among prisoners are at least three times higher for men and nine times higher for women than in the general population. The objective of this study is to describe the sociodemographic, penal, health characteristics and circumstances of suicide of French prisoners who died by suicide. METHODS: This study is an intermediate analysis of the French epidemiological surveillance program of suicides in prison. All suicides in prison in 2017-2018 in France were included in the study. Archival sociodemographic and penal data and specific data on the circumstances of the suicidal act were provided by the National Prison Service. Health data was provided by physicians working in prison using a standardized questionnaire. RESULTS: In 2017-2018, 235 prisoners died by suicide. The suicide rate was 16.8/10 000 person-years. Among suicide cases, 94.9% were male, 27.2% were under 30, 25.1% were aged 30 to 39, 27.7% were aged 40 to 49 and 20.0% were 50 or older. At the time of suicide, 48.5% were on custodial remand. Incarceration is associated with a threefold increase in the frequency of anxio-depressive disorders (24.6% in prison versus 8.2% before prison). The week before the suicidal act, 60% of prisoners visited the health unit and a significant event was detected for 61% of all cases. Suicide was less than 1 week after prison entry for 11.9% of prisoners, corresponding to a suicide rate 6.4 (CI95% [4.3 - 9.5]) times higher than for the remaining time in prison, and was more than 1 year after entry for 33.7% of them. CONCLUSIONS: The high frequency of events the week before suicide in our study suggests that events in prison could play a role in the occurrence of suicides. Comparative studies are needed to further explore the time association between events and suicide in prison. As most of prisoners who died by suicide visited the health unit the week before suicide, the identification of triggering factors could help psychiatrists and other health professionals to assess the short-term risk of suicide and to implement preventive measures.

Harmonized definition of occupational burnout: A systematic review, semantic analysis, and Delphi consensus in 29 countries.

Objective A consensual definition of occupational burnout is currently lacking. We aimed to harmonize the definition of occupational burnout as a health outcome in medical research and reach a consensus on this definition within the Network on the Coordination and Harmonisation of European Occupational Cohorts (OMEGA-NET). Methods First, we performed a systematic review in MEDLINE, PsycINFO and Embase (January 1990 to August 2018) and a semantic analysis of the available definitions. We used the definitions of burnout and burnout-related concepts from the Systematized Nomenclature of Medicine Clinical Terms (SNOMED-CT) to formulate a consistent harmonized definition of the concept. Second, we sought to obtain the Delphi consensus on the proposed definition. Results We identified 88 unique definitions of burnout and assigned each of them to 1 of the 11 original definitions. The semantic analysis yielded a first proposal, further reformulated according to SNOMED-CT and the panelists` comments as follows: "In a worker, occupational burnout or occupational physical AND emotional exhaustion state is an exhaustion due to prolonged exposure to work-related problems". A panel of 50 experts (researchers and healthcare professionals with an interest for occupational burnout) reached consensus on this proposal at the second round of the Delphi, with 82% of experts agreeing on it. Conclusion This study resulted in a harmonized definition of occupational burnout approved by experts from 29 countries within OMEGA-NET. Future research should address the reproducibility of the Delphi consensus in a larger panel of experts, representing more countries, and examine the practicability of the definition.

Response to letter to the editor from Dr Rahman Shiri: The challenging topic of suicide across occupational groups.

We thank Dr Rahman Shiri (1) for his careful reading of our systematic review and meta-analysis on suicide among agricultural, forestry, and fishery workers (2). Our paper had the objective of providing a pooled effect size of suicide for this occupational group. Suicide is a crucial issue in public and occupational health. Suicide has a multifactorial etiology and recent systematic reviews and meta-analyses have pointed out the role of occupational exposures, mainly psychosocial work stressors, as risk factors for suicide (3, 4). Suicide is a very rare event in the general population and still more seldom in the working population. Indeed, unemployed and economically inactive people have a higher risk of suicide compared to employed people (5, 6). However, the total number of suicides is greater in the employed population than among the economically inactive or unemployed (6). Shiri's letter (1) questioned several aspects of our review and meta-analysis. One comment related to the single reference database used in our review and a suggestion that our review could not be considered to be systematic. The review was based on Medline because our main interest was in quantitative epidemiologic studies. This is the largest database for biomedical literature and we would argue the most pertinent. Furthermore, we checked the reference lists of the most recent papers and literature reviews, and Shiri did not report any paper that was missing. No review, whether searching one or more databases, can expect to be totally exhaustive. There may always be missing studies, especially if we consider grey literature. Thus we assert that our review was systematic, while acknowledging that it may not be perfectly comprehensive. Shiri suggested an absence of quality assessment of the studies included in our meta-analysis. First, quality was considered in the context of our comments in the discussion section. Second, as suggested by Rothman et al (7), quality assessment was replaced by regression analyses of the effect of each quality item (study characteristics, ie, study design, effect measure, reference group, and adjustment). Third, because most studies included in this review were based on objective data (census, administrative, or register data), they were free of many of the sources of bias that exist in studies where information on exposure and outcome must be collected from participants. Consequently, many of the items related to quality were not pertinent, such as response and follow-up rates, coverage and representativeness of the sample, selection, etc. Contrary to what Shiri suggested, all study designs can be informative in this topic because all of them are able to provide an unbiased estimate of the effect size. In addition, the prospective and case-control studies may have shortcomings. For example, we excluded five studies including three prospective and case-control studies in the sensibility analysis because the group of interest was defined on the basis of the exposure to chemicals (pesticides) rather than job title. Our choice to retain the least adjusted models was justified because aggregated data were used for the meta-analysis. Therefore, unless all included studies adjusted for the same covariates measured in the same way, adjusted estimates cannot be meaningfully provided in an aggregate data meta-analysis. In addition, as the objective was above all descriptive and not etiological or explanatory, and as it is the norm in the exploration of social inequalities in health (8), the results from the least (gender- and age-) adjusted models were in line with the objective. Indeed, including more adjustment variables could lead to overadjustment as they may be intermediate variables on the causal pathways between occupation and suicide. Our strategy was in line with previous meta-analyses on similar topics (9-11). Consequently, we would argue that our results are not likely to be largely due to confounding, contrary to the comment by Shiri. Indeed, the study of the contribution of underlying factors in explaining social inequalities in health outcomes is a fully-fledged topic of research (12-15), but this is relevant research to conduct after demonstrating that inequalities exist between social or occupational groups. Several of Shiri's comments were about statistical aspects of our analyses. First, it was suggested that we did not correctly extract the confidence intervals for the estimates of several studies. We disagree. We used the STATA metan suite of commands using log-transformed effect sizes and standard errors. Our figure 1 and the values of effect sizes and confidence intervals were provided by STATA, this explains why there may be small differences in these values compared with the results published in some studies. Using log-transformed effect sizes and confidence intervals, the analysis provided the same results. Second, our subgroup comparison was based on subsamples that were independent. As not all studies provided information for these subgroups, each subgroup was treated as a unit of analysis. This strategy allows the use of all relevant subgroups and comparisons between them (16). Third, we were also criticized for the use of random-effects models. Random-effects models are generally more plausible for meta-analysis based on studies from the published literature, because the fixed-effect model assumed that the entire corpus of literature has been obtained, ie, that every study has been or ever will be written on the topic has been included, which is an implausible assumption. We also assumed differences in effect size between studies and between subgroups, and the use of random-effects models was consistent with such an assumption. However, random-effects models produce wider confidence intervals compared to fixed-effect models (16). These models are thus more conservative, making our results all the more robust. One of Shiri's comments related to the reference group used in the studies for the comparison of agricultural, forestry, and fishery workers. Although we reported that the studies using a specific occupational group as reference group provided a higher effect size than the studies using other reference groups, we did not explicitly recognize and state in the paper that the results for Japan were based on two studies using a specific occupational group as reference; we concede that this may explain why we found a much more elevated effect size for Japan. Shiri's results (1) allow to conclude that the difference between Japan and the other geographic areas could be explained by the choice of reference group-we are grateful to him for raising this point. However, we would note that the effect size of suicide was still elevated and significant for agricultural, forestry, and fishery workers even after this change in the reference group for these two studies. Nevertheless, the choice of the optimal reference group is not obvious. If we consider the general population as the reference group, as unemployed people and economically inactive people (including people who may not be working due to illness or disability) are part of it and have a higher risk of suicide than employed people, the effect size provided by the nine studies using the general population as the reference is likely to be underestimated, which may contribute to an underestimation of the observed effect size of suicide among agricultural, forestry, and fishery workers in our study. The comparison was made in our paper with the other occupational groups (ie, the working population except the group of interest) as the reference, which was used by nine other studies, but this did not allow to determine the exact rank of the group of interest in the occupational hierarchy. Another relevant choice would have been to retain the group with the lowest suicide risk (for example, the high-skilled occupational group) as the reference, which would have led to a much higher effect size of suicide for agricultural, forestry, and fishery workers. To conclude, as statistical power in detecting differences between subgroups may be low in subgroup analyses and meta-regression, the absence of significant results according to subgroups found in our results cannot be interpreted as evidence that the effect size is the same across subgroups. Consequently, our meta-analysis reporting a significant excess of risk of suicide among agricultural, forestry, and fishery workers may also be a good incentive for more research among this group of workers to (i) confirm this observed excess of risk using differing methodological approaches to meta-analysis and (ii) explore the potential differences within this group and the underlying factors that may explain this excess of risk. References 1. Shiri R. Suicide among agricultural, forestry, and fishery workers. Scand J Work Environ Health - online first. https://doi.org/10.5271/sjweh.3697 2. Klingelschmidt J, Milner A, Khireddine-Medouni I, Witt K, Alexopoulos EC, Toivanen S, et al. Suicide among agricultural, forestry, and fishery workers: a systematic literature review and meta-analysis. Scand J Work Environ Health - online first. https://doi.org/10.5271/sjweh.3682 3. Milner A, Witt K, LaMontagne AD, Niedhammer I. Psychosocial job stressors and suicidality: a meta-analysis and systematic review. Occup Environ Med - online first. https://doi.org/10.1136/oemed-2017-104531 4. Leach LS, Poyser C, Butterworth P. Workplace bullying and the association with suicidal ideation/thoughts and behaviour: a systematic review. Occup Environ Med. 2017;74(1):72-9. https://doi.org/10.1136/oemed-2016-103726 5. Milner A, Page A, LaMontagne AD. Long-term unemployment and suicide: a systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS One. 2013;8(1):e51333. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0051333 6. Milner A, Morrell S, Lamontagne AD. Economically inactive, unemployed and employed suicides in Australia byage and sex over a 10-year period: what was the impact of the 2007 economic recession? Int J Epidemiol. 2014;43(5):1500-7. https://doi.org/10.1093/ije/dyu148 7. Rothman KJ, Greenland S, Lash TL. Modern Epidemiology - Third Edition. Philadelphia: Wolters Kluwer Health - Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2008. 8. Lundberg I, Hemmingsson T, Hogstedt C. Work and social inequalities in health in Europe. Brussels: P.I.E. Peter Lang SA; 2007. 9. Milner A, Spittal MJ, Pirkis J, Lamontagne AD. Suicide by occupation: systematic review and meta-analysis. Br J Psychiatry. 2013;203(6):409-16. https://doi.org/10.1192/bjp.bp.113.128405 10. Lorant V, Deliege D, Eaton W, Robert A, Philippot P, Ansseau M. Socioeconomic inequalities in depression: a meta-analysis. Am J Epidemiol. 2003;157(2):98-112. https://doi.org/10.1093/aje/kwf182 11. Grittner U, Kuntsche S, Gmel G, Bloomfield K. Alcohol consumption and social inequality at the individual and country levels--results from an international study. Eur J Public Health. 2013;23(2):332-9. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurpub/cks044 12. Niedhammer I, Bourgkard E, Chau N. Occupational and behavioural factors in the explanation of social inequalities in premature and total mortality: a 12.5-year follow-up in the Lorhandicap study. Eur J Epidemiol. 2011;26(1):1-12. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10654-010-9506-9 13. Niedhammer I, Chastang JF, David S, Kelleher C. The contribution of occupational factors to social inequalities in health: findings from the national French SUMER survey. Soc Sci Med. 2008;67(11):1870-81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2008.09.007 14. Chazelle E, Lemogne C, Morgan K, Kelleher CC, Chastang JF, Niedhammer I. Explanations of educational differences in major depression and generalised anxiety disorder in the Irish population. J Affect Disord. 2011;134(1-3):304-14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2011.05.049 15. Niedhammer I, Lesuffleur T, Coutrot T, Chastang JF. Contribution of working conditions to occupational inequalities in depressive symptoms: results from the national French SUMER survey. Int Arch Occup Environ Health. 2016;89(6):1025-37.https://doi.org/10.1007/s00420-016-1142-6 16. Borenstein M, Hedges LV, Higgins JPT, Rothstein HR. Introduction to meta-analysis: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. ISBN: 978-0-470-05724-7; 2009. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470743386.

Suicide among agricultural, forestry, and fishery workers: a systematic literature review and meta-analysis.

Objectives This review aimed to quantify suicide risk among agricultural, forestry, and fishery workers and study potential variations of risk within this population. Methods We conducted a systematic literature review and meta-analysis from 1995 to 2016 using MEDLINE and following the PRISMA guidelines. A pooled effect size of suicide risk among the population of interest was calculated using meta-analysis. Subgroup analyses were conducted to investigate whether effect size differed according to population or study characteristics. Meta-regression was used to identify sources of heterogeneity. Results The systematic review identified 65 studies, of which 32 were included in the meta-analysis. Pooled effect size was 1.48 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.30-1.68] representing an excess of suicide risk among the population of interest. Subgroup analysis showed that this effect size varied according to geographic area, with a higher effect size in Japan. The following study characteristics were found to contribute to the between-study variance: reference group, measure of effect size, and study design. Conclusions Our findings suggest an excess of suicide risk among agricultural, forestry, and fishery workers and demonstrated that this excess may be even higher for these groups in Japan. This review highlights the need for suicide prevention policies focusing on this specific population of workers. More research is also needed to better understand the underlying factors that may increase suicide risk in this population.