Gli Autori affrontano alcuni aspetti concettuali e metodologici legati allo studio della morbilità psichiatrica nella medicina di base. Vengono discussi i concetti di «malattia» in generale e di «caso psichiatrico» in particolare, con le ripercussioni che tali definizioni possono avere sull'attività di ricerca. Sono presentati i risultati di alcuni studi che hanno utilizzato i modelli statistici basati sulla latent trait theory per indagare i disturbi emotivi di comune riscontro tra i pazienti del medico di base. È stato cosi possibile evidenziare che tali disturbi tendono a distribuirsi lungo un continuum in assenza di punti di interruzione o di rarità. I problemi diagnostici tuttora presenti nella medicina di base sono considerati alia luce delle difficoltà nell'applicazione delle tradizionali categorie diagnostiche e delle prospettive aperte dai recenti sistemi multiassiali di classificazione.

medicina di base, disturbi emotivi, diagnosi.

The Authors examine some conceptual and methodological issues involved in the study of psychiatric morbidity in primary care settings. The concept of «disease» in general and that of «psychiatric case» in particular are discussed together with the implications that such definitions may have in research activity. Some studies are reviewed which have employed statistical models based on latent trait theoryto investigate the emotional disorders commonly found among subjects who consult the general practitioner. It becomes apparent that these disorders tend to distribute along a continuum with no rarity points or interruptions. Diagnostic problems still present in primary care settings are considered paying attention to the difficulties in the application of traditional diagnostic categories and to the new perspectives disclosed by recent multiaxial systems of classification.

In the United States, lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, intersex, asexual and other sexually minoritized and gender expansive (LGBTQ+) young adults are at increased risk for experiencing mental health inequities, including anxiety, depression and psychological distress-related challenges associated with their sexual and gender identities. LGBTQ+ young adults may have unique experiences of sexual and gender minority-related vulnerability because of LGBTQ+-related minority stress and stressors, such as heterosexism, family rejection, identity concealment and internalized homophobia. Identifying and understanding specific LGBTQ+-related minority stress experiences and their complex roles in contributing to mental health burden among LGBTQ+ young adults could inform public health efforts to eliminate mental health inequities experienced by LGBTQ+ young adults. Therefore, this study sought to form empirically based risk profiles (i.e., latent classes) of LGBTQ+ young adults based on their experiences with familial heterosexist experiences, LGBTQ+-related family rejection, internalized LGBTQ+-phobia and LGBTQ+ identity concealment, and then identify associations of derived classes with psychological distress.

We recruited and enrolled participants using nonprobability, cross-sectional online survey data collected between May and August 2020 (N = 482). We used a three-step latent class analysis (LCA) approach to identify unique classes of response patterns to LGBTQ+-related minority stressor subscale items (i.e., familial heterosexist experiences, LGBTQ+-related family rejection, internalized LGBTQ+-phobia and LGBTQ+ identity concealment), and multinomial logistic regression to characterize the associations between the derived classes and psychological distress.

Five distinct latent classes emerged from the LCA: (1) low minority stress, (2) LGBTQ+ identity concealment, (3) family rejection, (4) moderate minority stress and (5) high minority stress. Participants who were classified in the high and moderate minority stress classes were more likely to suffer from moderate and severe psychological distress compared to those classified in the low minority stress class. Additionally, relative to those in the low minority stress class, participants who were classified in the LGBTQ+ identity concealment group were more likely to suffer from severe psychological distress.

Familial heterosexist experiences, LGBTQ+-related family rejection, internalized LGBTQ+-phobia and LGBTQ+ identity concealment are four constructs that have been extensively examined as predictors for mental health outcomes among LGBTQ+ persons, and our study is among the first to reveal nuanced gradients of these stressors. Additionally, we found that more severe endorsement of minority stress was associated with greater psychological distress. Given our study results and the previously established negative mental health impacts of minority stressors among LGBTQ+ young adults, findings from our study can inform research, practice, and policy reform and development that could prevent and reduce mental health inequities among LGBTQ+ young adults.

Although natural hazards (e.g., tropical cyclones, earthquakes) disproportionately affect developing countries, most research on their mental health impact has been conducted in high-income countries. We aimed to summarize prevalences of mental disorders in Global South populations (classified according to the United Nations Human Development Index) affected by natural hazards.

To identify eligible studies for this meta-analysis, we searched MEDLINE, PsycINFO and Web of Science up to February 13, 2024, for observational studies with a cross-sectional or longitudinal design that reported on at least 100 adult survivors of natural hazards in a Global South population and assessed mental disorders with a validated instrument at least 1 month after onset of the hazard. Main outcomes were the short- and long-term prevalence estimates of mental disorders. The project was registered on the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD42023396622).

We included 77 reports of 75 cross-sectional studies (six included a non-exposed control group) comprising 82,400 individuals. We found high prevalence estimates for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) in the general population (26.0% [95% CI 18.5–36.3]; I2 = 99.0%) and depression (21.7% [95% CI 10.5–39.6]; I2 = 99.2%) during the first year following the event, with similar prevalences observed thereafter (i.e., 26.0% and 23.4%, respectively). Results were similar for regions with vs. without recent armed conflict. In displaced samples, the estimated prevalence for PTSD was 46.5% (95% CI 39.0–54.2; k = 6; I2 = 93.3). We furthermore found higher symptom severity in exposed, versus unexposed, individuals. Data on other disorders were scarce, apart from short-term prevalence estimates of generalised anxiety disorder (15.9% [95% CI 4.7–42.0]; I2 = 99.4).

Global South populations exposed to natural hazards report a substantial burden of mental disease. These findings require further attention and action in terms of implementation of mental health policies and low-threshold interventions in the Global South in the aftermath of natural hazards. However, to accurately quantify the true extent of this public health challenge, we need more rigorous, well-designed epidemiological studies across diverse regions. This will enable informed decision making and resource allocation for those in need.

At the basis of many important research questions is causality – does X causally impact Y? For behavioural and psychiatric traits, answering such questions can be particularly challenging, as they are highly complex and multifactorial. ‘Triangulation’ refers to prospectively choosing, conducting and integrating several methods to investigate a specific causal question. If different methods, with different sources of bias, all indicate a causal effect, the finding is much less likely to be spurious. While triangulation can be a powerful approach, its interpretation differs across (sub)fields and there are no formal guidelines. Here, we aim to provide clarity and guidance around the process of triangulation for behavioural and psychiatric epidemiology, so that results of existing triangulation studies can be better interpreted, and new triangulation studies better designed.

We first introduce the concept of triangulation and how it is applied in epidemiological investigations of behavioural and psychiatric traits. Next, we put forth a systematic step-by-step guide, that can be used to design a triangulation study (accompanied by a worked example). Finally, we provide important general recommendations for future studies.

While the literature contains varying interpretations, triangulation generally refers to an investigation that assesses the robustness of a potential causal finding by explicitly combining different approaches. This may include multiple types of statistical methods, the same method applied in multiple samples, or multiple different measurements of the variable(s) of interest. In behavioural and psychiatric epidemiology, triangulation commonly includes prospective cohort studies, natural experiments and/or genetically informative designs (including the increasingly popular method of Mendelian randomization). The guide that we propose aids the planning and interpreting of triangulation by prompting crucial considerations. Broadly, its steps are as follows: determine your causal question, draw a directed acyclic graph, identify available resources and samples, identify suitable methodological approaches, further specify the causal question for each method, explicate the effects of potential biases and, pre-specify expected results. We illustrated the guide’s use by considering the question: ‘Does maternal tobacco smoking during pregnancy cause offspring depression?’.

In the current era of big data, and with increasing (public) availability of large-scale datasets, triangulation will become increasingly relevant in identifying robust risk factors for adverse mental health outcomes. Our hope is that this review and guide will provide clarity and direction, as well as stimulate more researchers to apply triangulation to causal questions around behavioural and psychiatric traits.

Previous studies have reported inconsistent findings regarding the association between post-traumatic stress (PTS) and post-traumatic growth (PTG). Three major issues could account for this inconsistency: (1) the lack of information about mental health problems before the disaster, (2) the concept of PTG is still under scrutiny for potentially being an illusionary perception of personal growth and (3) the overlooking of PTS comorbidities as time-dependent confounding factors. To address these issues, we explored the associations of PTS and PTG with trauma-related diseases and examined the association between PTS and PTG using marginal structural models to address time-dependent confounding, considering pre-disaster covariates, among older survivors of the 2011 Japan Earthquake and Tsunami.

Seven months before the disaster, the baseline survey was implemented to ask older adults about their health in a city located 80 km west of the epicentre. After the disaster, we implemented follow-up surveys approximately every 3 years to collect information about PTS and comorbidities (depressive symptoms, smoking and drinking). We asked respondents about their PTG in the 2022 survey (n = 1,489 in the five-wave panel data).

PTG was protectively associated with functional disability (coefficient −0.47, 95% confidence interval (CI) −0.82, −0.12, P < 0.01) and cognitive decline assessed by trained investigators (coefficient −0.07, 95% CI −0.11, −0.03, P < 0.01) and physicians (coefficient −0.06, 95% CI −0.11, −0.02, P < 0.01), while PTS was not significantly associated with them. Severely affected PTS (binary variable) was associated with higher PTG scores, even after adjusting for depressive symptoms, smoking and drinking as time-dependent confounders (coefficient 0.35, 95% CI 0.24, 0.46, P < 0.01). We also found that an ordinal variable of the PTS score had an inverse U-shaped association with PTG.

PTG and PTS were differentially associated with functional and cognitive disabilities. Thus, PTG might not simply be a cognitive bias among survivors with severe PTS. The results also indicated that the number of symptoms in PTS had an inverse U-shaped association with PTG. Our findings provided robust support for the theory of PTG, suggesting that moderate levels of psychological struggles (i.e., PTS) are essential for achieving PTG, whereas intense PTS may hinder the attainment of PTG. From a clinical perspective, interventions that encourage social support could be beneficial in achieving PTG by facilitating deliberate rumination.