Invited discussant comments during the UCL–Penn Global COVID Study webinar ‘Reflections, Resilience, and Recovery: A qualitative study of Covid-19’s impact on an international adult population’s mental health and priorities for support’: part 1 of 3

There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

Abstract

This discussant commentary will consider global health before the pandemic in relation to the UCL–Penn Global COVID Study survey results on what participants need to recover from the pandemic. It explores the case for expanding access to health care, the importance of culturally sensitive interventions and the need to scale up psychologically evidence-based interventions. Reflecting on the UCL–Penn Global COVID Study ‘Let’s Talk! What do you need to recover from Covid-19?’ webinar, the commentary highlights the recommendations from the British Psychological Society (BPS) to the government on what needs to happen for a better recovery.

Related collections

Most cited references 4

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Prevalence, severity, and unmet need for treatment of mental disorders in the World Health Organization World Mental Health Surveys.

Jose Posada-Villa, Ronny Bruffaerts, Koen Demyttenaere … (2004)

Little is known about the extent or severity of untreated mental disorders, especially in less-developed countries. To estimate prevalence, severity, and treatment of Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition (DSM-IV) mental disorders in 14 countries (6 less developed, 8 developed) in the World Health Organization (WHO) World Mental Health (WMH) Survey Initiative. Face-to-face household surveys of 60 463 community adults conducted from 2001-2003 in 14 countries in the Americas, Europe, the Middle East, Africa, and Asia. The DSM-IV disorders, severity, and treatment were assessed with the WMH version of the WHO Composite International Diagnostic Interview (WMH-CIDI), a fully structured, lay-administered psychiatric diagnostic interview. The prevalence of having any WMH-CIDI/DSM-IV disorder in the prior year varied widely, from 4.3% in Shanghai to 26.4% in the United States, with an interquartile range (IQR) of 9.1%-16.9%. Between 33.1% (Colombia) and 80.9% (Nigeria) of 12-month cases were mild (IQR, 40.2%-53.3%). Serious disorders were associated with substantial role disability. Although disorder severity was correlated with probability of treatment in almost all countries, 35.5% to 50.3% of serious cases in developed countries and 76.3% to 85.4% in less-developed countries received no treatment in the 12 months before the interview. Due to the high prevalence of mild and subthreshold cases, the number of those who received treatment far exceeds the number of untreated serious cases in every country. Reallocation of treatment resources could substantially decrease the problem of unmet need for treatment of mental disorders among serious cases. Structural barriers exist to this reallocation. Careful consideration needs to be given to the value of treating some mild cases, especially those at risk for progressing to more serious disorders.

0 comments Cited 393 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Poverty, depression, and anxiety: Causal evidence and mechanisms

Matthew Ridley, Gautam Rao, Frank Schilbach … (2020)

Why are people who live in poverty disproportionately affected by mental illness? We review the interdisciplinary evidence of the bidirectional causal relationship between poverty and common mental illnesses—depression and anxiety—and the underlying mechanisms. Research shows that mental illness reduces employment and therefore income, and that psychological interventions generate economic gains. Similarly, negative economic shocks cause mental illness, and antipoverty programs such as cash transfers improve mental health. A crucial step toward the design of effective policies is to better understand the mechanisms underlying these causal effects.

0 comments Cited 275 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Is Open Access

Improving Access to Psychological Therapies (IAPT) in the United Kingdom: A systematic review and meta‐analysis of 10‐years of practice‐based evidence

Sarah Wakefield, Stephen Kellett, Melanie Simmonds‐Buckley … (2020)

Improving Access to Psychological Therapies (IAPT) is a national-level dissemination programme for provision of evidence-based psychological treatments for anxiety and depression in the United Kingdom. This paper sought to review and meta-analyse practice-based evidence arising from the programme.

0 comments Cited 51 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

All references

Author and article information

Journal

Journal ID (nlm-ta): UCL Open Environ

Journal ID (publisher-id): UCLOE

Title: UCL Open Environment

Abbreviated Title: UCL Open Environ

Publisher: UCL Press (UK )

ISSN (Electronic): 2632-0886

Publication date (Electronic, pub): 01 December 2022

Publication date (Electronic, collection): 2022

Volume: 4

Electronic Location Identifier: e008

Affiliations

[1 ]Policy Advisor, The British Psychological Society, UK

Author notes

*Corresponding author: E-mail: nigel.atter@ 123456bps.org.uk

Author information

Nigel Atter https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8605-3207

Article

DOI: 10.14324/111.444/ucloe.100008

PMC ID: 10208334

SO-VID: fdeab39a-1c17-4c27-a87c-8c1761839c1e

License:

This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Licence (CC BY) 4.0, which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

History

Page count

References: 11, Pages: 6

Comments

Comment on this article

scite_

Smart Citations

Citing PublicationsSupportingMentioningContrasting

View Citations

See how this article has been cited at scite.ai

scite shows how a scientific paper has been cited by providing the context of the citation, a classification describing whether it supports, mentions, or contrasts the cited claim, and a label indicating in which section the citation was made.