Students' mental health during the pandemic: results of the observational cross-sectional COVID-19 MEntal health inTernational for university Students (COMET-S) study.

Introduction: The aim of the study was to search rates of depression and mental health in university students, during the COVID-19 pandemic. Materials and methods: This is an observational cross-sectional study. A protocol gathering sociodemographic variables as well as depression, anxiety and suicidality and conspiracism was assembled, and data were collected anonymously and online from April 2020 through March 2021. The sample included 12,488 subjects from 11 countries, of whom 9,026 were females (72.2%; aged 21.11 ± 2.53), 3,329 males (26.65%; aged 21.61 ± 2.81) and 133 "non-binary gender" (1.06%; aged 21.02 ± 2.98). The analysis included chi-square tests, correlation analysis, ANCOVA, multiple forward stepwise linear regression analysis and Relative Risk ratios. Results: Dysphoria was present in 15.66% and probable depression in 25.81% of the total study sample. More than half reported increase in anxiety and depression and 6.34% in suicidality, while lifestyle changes were significant. The model developed explained 18.4% of the development of depression. Believing in conspiracy theories manifested a complex effect. Close to 25% was believing that the vaccines include a chip and almost 40% suggested that facemask wearing could be a method of socio-political control. Conspiracism was related to current depression but not to history of mental disorders. Discussion: The current study reports that students are at high risk for depression during the COVID-19 pandemic and identified specific risk factors. It also suggested a role of believing in conspiracy theories. Further research is important, as it is targeted intervention in students' groups that are vulnerable both concerning mental health and conspiracism.

Gender, age at onset, and duration of being ill as predictors for the long-term course and outcome of schizophrenia: an international multicenter study.

BACKGROUND: The aim of the current study was to explore the effect of gender, age at onset, and duration on the long-term course of schizophrenia. METHODS: Twenty-nine centers from 25 countries representing all continents participated in the study that included 2358 patients aged 37.21 ± 11.87 years with a DSM-IV or DSM-5 diagnosis of schizophrenia; the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale as well as relevant clinicodemographic data were gathered. Analysis of variance and analysis of covariance were used, and the methodology corrected for the presence of potentially confounding effects. RESULTS: There was a 3-year later age at onset for females (P < .001) and lower rates of negative symptoms (P < .01) and higher depression/anxiety measures (P < .05) at some stages. The age at onset manifested a distribution with a single peak for both genders with a tendency of patients with younger onset having slower advancement through illness stages (P = .001). No significant effects were found concerning duration of illness. DISCUSSION: Our results confirmed a later onset and a possibly more benign course and outcome in females. Age at onset manifested a single peak in both genders, and surprisingly, earlier onset was related to a slower progression of the illness. No effect of duration has been detected. These results are partially in accord with the literature, but they also differ as a consequence of the different starting point of our methodology (a novel staging model), which in our opinion precluded the impact of confounding effects. Future research should focus on the therapeutic policy and implications of these results in more representative samples.

Modeling psychological function in patients with schizophrenia with the PANSS: an international multi-center study.

BACKGROUND: The aim of the current study was to explore the changing interrelationships among clinical variables through the stages of schizophrenia in order to assemble a comprehensive and meaningful disease model. METHODS: Twenty-nine centers from 25 countries participated and included 2358 patients aged 37.21 ± 11.87 years with schizophrenia. Multiple linear regression analysis and visual inspection of plots were performed. RESULTS: The results suggest that with progression stages, there are changing correlations among Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale factors at each stage and each factor correlates with all the others in that particular stage, in which this factor is dominant. This internal structure further supports the validity of an already proposed four stages model, with positive symptoms dominating the first stage, excitement/hostility the second, depression the third, and neurocognitive decline the last stage. CONCLUSIONS: The current study investigated the mental organization and functioning in patients with schizophrenia in relation to different stages of illness progression. It revealed two distinct "cores" of schizophrenia, the "Positive" and the "Negative," while neurocognitive decline escalates during the later stages. Future research should focus on the therapeutic implications of such a model. Stopping the progress of the illness could demand to stop the succession of stages. This could be achieved not only by both halting the triggering effect of positive and negative symptoms, but also by stopping the sensitization effect on the neural pathways responsible for the development of hostility, excitement, anxiety, and depression as well as the deleterious effect on neural networks responsible for neurocognition.

Staging of Schizophrenia With the Use of PANSS: An International Multi-Center Study.

INTRODUCTION: A specific clinically relevant staging model for schizophrenia has not yet been developed. The aim of the current study was to evaluate the factor structure of the PANSS and develop such a staging method. METHODS: Twenty-nine centers from 25 countries contributed 2358 patients aged 37.21 ± 11.87 years with schizophrenia. Analysis of covariance, Exploratory Factor Analysis, Discriminant Function Analysis, and inspection of resultant plots were performed. RESULTS: Exploratory Factor Analysis returned 5 factors explaining 59% of the variance (positive, negative, excitement/hostility, depression/anxiety, and neurocognition). The staging model included 4 main stages with substages that were predominantly characterized by a single domain of symptoms (stage 1: positive; stages 2a and 2b: excitement/hostility; stage 3a and 3b: depression/anxiety; stage 4a and 4b: neurocognition). There were no differences between sexes. The Discriminant Function Analysis developed an algorithm that correctly classified >85% of patients. DISCUSSION: This study elaborates a 5-factor solution and a clinical staging method for patients with schizophrenia. It is the largest study to address these issues among patients who are more likely to remain affiliated with mental health services for prolonged periods of time.

Patients' resilience and distress over time: Is resilience a prognostic indicator of treatment?

BACKGROUND: Resilience is a positive adaptation or the ability to maintain mental health despite experiencing difficulty. Many researchers are linking resilience with many aspects of life, most often with better mental health. Resilience can affect health status and symptoms, but conversely, it can also be affected by health status or symptoms. From the literature it appears that resilience can even be a predictor of psychiatric symptoms. Resilience can predict severity of symptoms, but the question is whether symptoms can also affect resilience over time when previous levels of resilience are controlled for. The aim of this study was to explore the relationship of resilience scores and the expression of distress in the context of treatment over time. METHODS: Ninety-five patients diagnosed with affective and anxiety disorders from a clinical sample treated psychotherapeutically with (N=81) or without (N=14) a pharmacological treatment at a psychotherapy day center participated in the study. All the participants were assessed three times: at the beginning of the treatment, after treatment (after 6weeks), and after a follow-up interval of 6months after the end of therapy. The Resilience Scale for Adults and the Clinical Outcomes in Routine Evaluation Outcome Measure were used in the study. RESULTS: All distress indicators were expressed more before the treatment compared to right after the treatment or half a year after the treatment. Distress indicators were more stable from Time 1 to Time 2, while from Time 2 to Time 3 they were less stable. In this study, resilience increased during the treatment and stayed stable after the treatment. Looking at bidirectional relationships between distress indicators and resilience over time, the results of this study suggest that levels of resilience have a prognostic value for the reduction of symptoms over the course of treatment. However, decrease in distress does not predict increase in resilience. CONCLUSIONS: Levels of resilience measured by RSA scores seem to have a certain prognostic value for the reduction of symptoms over the course of treatment. Perception of self was the strongest predictor of lower levels of distress over time when distress and perception of self-stability are controlled for. Results suggest that decreased distress indicators are not directly related to increasing resilience over six weeks or over six months. Considering that resilience is rather stable over time and indicators are less stable, it is possible that resilience could be increased by personal or environmental factors, and a decrease in distress is not a contributing factor. In this study distress decreased over time, while resilience characteristics increased for the whole sample. Patients in this study underwent treatment, and decreases in global distress were a result of treatment. An increase in resilience over time supports the effectiveness of treatment. However, there were no significant differences between treatment types while evaluating models. Results suggest that treatments (psychotherapy or psychopharmacological with psychotherapy) were equally effective for the chosen patients.

Resilience in a reborn nation: Validation of the Lithuanian Resilience Scale for Adults (RSA).

BACKGROUND: Resilience, as an ability to withstand or rebound from crisis or adversity, is becoming an increasingly significant concept in health promotion and well-being. Individuals exhibiting resilience use skills or resources flexibly to solve situational demands. The Resilience Scale for Adults (RSA) may be used to assess protective resources, and the aim of the present study was to validate the Lithuanian translation. METHODS: The translated RSA was administered to a clinical (n=125) and a non clinical sample (n=499) to examine the discriminant validity of the RSA items with a confirmatory factor analysis, the internal consistency as well as construct validity by correlating it with the Quick Psycho-Affective Symptoms Scan (QPASS). RESULTS: The internal consistency, the test-retest stability and the factor structure were replicated as adequate, thus indicating good psychometric properties and support of discriminant validity. Females reported more resilience resources for the domains of social competence, family cohesion and social resources compared to men. The RSA subscales correlated negatively with the QPASS scores, and patients reported significantly less resilience resources than non-patients, thus indicating construct validity. CONCLUSIONS: Valid psychometric tools for research purposes and routine every-day use are urgently needed in Lithuania, a young nation still under numerous challenges due to social, economic and political transitions. The RSA represents a reliable and valid tool for assessing protective factors. Assessing resilience factors may extend the understanding of factors relevant for mental health problems as well as treatment prognosis beyond the capabilities of mere symptom oriented approaches.

Translating the Clinical Outcomes in Routine Evaluation Outcome Measure (CORE-OM) into Lithuanian.

BACKGROUND: There are no standardized tools in Lithuanian feasible for ongoing routine use to measure the effectiveness of psychotherapeutic treatment. The CORE-OM is a widely used 34-item self-report measure for such purpose. AIMS: To explore the reliability, validity and sensitivity of the Lithuanian translation of CORE-OM questionnaire. METHODS: A validation study of the CORE-OM was conducted in the psychiatric clinic attached to Vilnius University. A Lithuanian translation of the English original CORE-OM was prepared by a team of translators. Then 39 psychotherapy outpatients and 187 students were asked to complete the Lithuanian version of the CORE-OM; 66 were tested twice to determine test-retest stability. Analysis included both internal and test-retest reliability, acceptability, influence of gender, principal component analysis and criteria for reliable and clinically significant change. RESULTS: Internal and test-retest reliability were good (0.61-0.94), though somewhat lower for the risk domain (α: 0.57-0.79, Spearman's rho 0.25-0.60). Differences between scores of the clinical and non-clinical samples were large and significant (P < 0.001). Some of the Lithuanian criteria for clinically significant change were a bit lower than those of the original UK criteria (e.g. well-being) and others higher (symptoms, functioning, overall score), illustrating the need for local exploration. CONCLUSIONS: In spite of small differences in psychometric properties from the original, the Lithuanian version of the CORE-OM was reliable and sensitive in both clinical and non-clinical settings. It has the potential to become a practical, sensitive and reliable tool for psychotherapists in Lithuania.