Higher risk-less data: A systematic review and meta-analysis on the role of sex and gender in trauma research.

Women and men are at different risk for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). It is unclear, however, how studies on PTSD risk factors integrate this knowledge into their research. Moreover, the temporal development of women's higher PTSD risk is unknown. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we examine how prospective studies on PTSD development (k = 47) consider sex and gender across four domains (samples, terminology, analyses, and reporting). Further, we differentially analyze sex/gender differences within five time intervals from 1 month to 5 years posttrauma. PTSD prevalence (OR = 1.72 [1.27-2.34]) and severity (g = 0.31 [0.09, 0.53]) were increased for women relative to men at 1 month posttrauma already, that is, at the first timepoint of a possible PTSD diagnosis. PTSD severity was elevated for women compared to men across all time intervals, but evidence for increased PTSD prevalence for women relative to men was less stable with longer follow-ups. Despite women's higher PTSD burdens, they were clearly underrepresented in samples (68.3% male, 31.7% female participants). Only 5.0% of studies explained or described their understanding of sex and gender, and only 2.6% used sex as discovery variable, that is, investigating sex-dependent risk mechanisms. Sex and gender aspects in design, data, and discussion were considered by only one-third of studies each. Trauma research falls short of its potential to adequately consider sex and gender. Sex- and gender-sensitive practices can advance rigor, innovation, and equity in psychopathology research. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

[Depression in the field of tension of gender roles]. / Die Depression im Spannungsfeld der Geschlechterrollen.

BACKGROUND: The distribution of depression and suicidal ideation by gender reveals a gender paradox: women are at least twice as likely to be diagnosed with depressive disorders but have a lower suicide rate than men. In contrast, the suicide rate of men is at least three times higher than women, while the prevalence of depressive disorders is only half as high. Although these differences have long been known the reasons for this paradox are still not fully understood. AIM OF THE ARTICLE AND METHOD: The aim of this narrative review article is to discuss possible explanatory models regarding gender differences in depressive disorders. Aspects related to stress processing and traumatization are considered as well as sociological and biological factors. This article summarizes information that was considered particularly relevant in the interdisciplinary dialogue regarding possible explanatory factors for gender differences in depressive disorders. RESULTS: The summarized studies indicate that women and men differ in certain aspects of stress processing and trauma exposure but men do not have a lower risk of disease as a result. On the contrary, the frequency of depressive disorders in men seems to be underestimated due to an atypical symptom manifestation. DISCUSSION: The implementation of knowledge about gender-specific vulnerability in the training of physicians and psychotherapists, the systematic assessment of gender beyond binary classifications as well as further diversity domains in research and healthcare as well as gender-sensitive and diversity-sensitive prevention strategies could contribute to the resolution of the gender paradox.

Exploring transdiagnostic stress and trauma-related symptoms across the world: a latent class analysis.

Background: Although trauma exposure is universally prevalent, the ways in which individuals respond to potentially traumatic events vary. Between-country differences have been identified as affecting the development and manifestation of transdiagnostic psychological symptoms, but it remains unclear how stress and trauma-related transdiagnostic symptoms and risk patterns differ based on geographic region.Objective: To explore whether there are distinct classes of stress and trauma-related transdiagnostic symptoms and to determine predictors of class membership in a global sample.Method: Participants (N = 8675) from 115 different countries were recruited online between 2020-2022 and completed the Global Psychotrauma Screen, which assesses stress and trauma exposure, related symptoms, and risk factors. A latent class analysis (LCA) was used to identify classes of stress and trauma-related symptoms per world region (African States, Asia-Pacific States, Eastern European States, Latin American and Caribbean States, Western European and Other States, and North America) and the total sample. Likelihood of class membership was assessed based on demographics, characteristics of the potentially traumatic event, and potential risk factors across the world regions.Results: Similar class compositions were observed across regions. A joint latent class analysis identified three classes that differed by symptom severity (i.e. high, moderate, low). Multinomial logistic regression analyses revealed several factors that conferred greater risk for experiencing higher levels of symptoms, including geographic region, gender, and lack of social support, among others.Conclusions: Stress and trauma-related symptoms seem to be similarly transdiagnostic across the world, supporting the value of a transdiagnostic assessment.

A latent class analysis of transdiagnostic stress and trauma-related symptoms in a global sample showed high, medium, and low symptom classes.Class compositions were similar across global geographic regions.Several factors were associated with high symptom class membership globally, including gender, geographic region, and lack of social support.

Talking about Familial Breast and Ovarian Cancer Risk-Evaluation of a Psychosocial Training Module for Gynecologists in Germany.

Primary care gynecologists are increasingly integrated into the care of patients with hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC) risks. These physicians should not only have basic genetic knowledge; they should also feel able to sensitively address an increased HBOC risk and deal with emotional, stressful situations in this context. Our project aimed at developing a training module, 'iKNOWgynetics', addressing psychosocial challenges in the context of HBOC care for primary care gynecologists. We developed the psychosocial training module in three phases: first, we conducted an online survey with n = 35 women with a family history of breast or ovarian cancer to assess patients' experiences and needs. Second, based on the results of the needs assessment, we developed the training module. Third, we evaluated the training by assessing physicians' (n = 109) self-efficacy with regard to communication skills in the context of HBOC before and after the training. In the needs assessment, seven psychosocial themes emerged. These themes, complementing a review of the literature, informed the training curriculum. The training was divided into two parts: (1) communicating with women before genetic testing and (2) care co-management for women with HBOC after genetic testing. After the training, participants reported a significant increase in self-efficacy in three domains: communicating empathetically, educating patients in a comprehensible way and dealing with emotionally challenging situations. Our results highlight the relevance of psychosocial issues for patients with HBOC. A genetic literacy training module that integrates aspects of psychosocial care increases physicians' confidence in dealing with emotionally challenging situations before and after their patients' genetic testing. Thus, such trainings may improve the care of women with hereditary cancer risks.