Between 2008 and 2019, we reported positive change relating to mental health stigma and discrimination among the adult population of England, supporting the effectiveness of the Time to Change campaign.

Using data from the Attitudes to Mental Illness survey (2008/2009 to 2023), we investigated the extent to which positive changes in stigma were sustained by 2023, 2 years after the programme's end in 2021.

We used regression analyses to evaluate trends in outcomes. Measures were of stigma-related knowledge (Mental Health Knowledge Schedule (MAKS)), attitudes (Community Attitudes toward the Mentally Ill scale (CAMI)) and desire for social distance (Reported and Intended Behaviour Scale (RIBS)). We also examined willingness to interact with people based on vignettes of depression and schizophrenia, and attitudes toward workplace discrimination, using data from the British Social Attitudes Survey for comparison.

CAMI scores improved between 2008 and 2023 (s.d. 0.24, 95% CI 0.16–0.31), but decreased since 2019 (P = 0.015). After improvements between 2009 and 2019, 2023 MAKS and RIBS scores no longer differed from 2009 scores, indicating decreases in stigma-related knowledge (MAKS scores declined 7.8%; P < 0.001) and willingness to interact (RIBS scores declined by 10.2%; P < 0.001) since 2019. Conversely, comparison with British Social Attitudes Survey data indicated that willingness to interact with people with depression and schizophrenia increased gradually between 2007, 2015 and 2023, and attitudes to workplace discrimination also improved.

The lasting positive changes reflect support for non-discrimination and willingness to interact with someone after a sense of familiarity is evoked. Besides the end of Time to Change, interpretations for declines in other outcomes include the COVID-19 pandemic and economic stress.

Chemsex occurs primarily among gay, bisexual and other men who have sex with men (GBMSM), and there is evidence of a subgroup of users who carry out chemsex-related criminal offences and experience harm. Challenges with chemsex can present to various settings; there are concerns that harm is increasing, including at interfaces between health, social care and criminal justice systems. The UK response to date has lacked a coordinated approach. An expert reference group was convened to share chemsex knowledge, articulate priorities for research and pathway development, and foster collaborative working between agencies. It made three key recommendations: develop and increase training and awareness across all services; implement a coordinated research programme with the development of a common data-set and assessment tool to fully characterise population-level needs; develop a professional network to share information, provide professional support and act as a knowledge hub. There was support for a unified multi-agency strategy incorporating the priorities identified as overarching principles.

We aimed to assess whether viewing expert witness evidence regarding the mental health of Johnny Depp and Amber Heard in the 2022 court case in the USA would affect viewers’ attitudes towards the mental health of the two protagonists and towards mental illness in general. After viewing excerpts of the cross-examination evidence, 38 trial-naive undergraduate students completed the Prejudice towards People with a Mental Illness (PPMI) scale.

Following viewing, participants held more stigmatising views of the protagonists than they held about mental disorders in general.

It is plausible that mass media trial coverage further stigmatises mental illness.

Enduring ethnic inequalities exist in mental healthcare. The COVID-19 pandemic has widened these.

To explore stakeholder perspectives on how the COVID-19 pandemic has increased ethnic inequalities in mental healthcare.

A qualitative interview study of four areas in England with 34 patients, 15 carers and 39 mental health professionals from National Health Service (NHS) and community organisations (July 2021 to July 2022). Framework analysis was used to develop a logic model of inter-relationships between pre-pandemic barriers and COVID-19 impacts.

Impacts were largely similar across sites, with some small variations (e.g. positive service impacts of higher ethnic diversity in area 2). Pre-pandemic barriers at individual level included mistrust and thus avoidance of services and at a service level included the dominance of a monocultural model, leading to poor communication, disengagement and alienation. During the pandemic remote service delivery, closure of community organisations and media scapegoating exacerbated existing barriers by worsening alienation and communication barriers, fuelling prejudice and division, and increasing mistrust in services. Some minority ethnic patients reported positive developments, experiencing empowerment through self-determination and creative activities.

During the COVID-19 pandemic some patients showed resilience and developed adaptations that could be nurtured by services. However, there has been a reduction in the availability of group-specific NHS and third-sector services in the community, exacerbating pre-existing barriers. As these developments are likely to have long-term consequences for minority ethnic groups’ engagement with mental healthcare, they need to be addressed as a priority by the NHS and its partners.

With growing numbers of countries legalizing euthanasia or assisted suicide (EAS), there is a debate as to whether EAS should also be available to people with severe, treatment-resistant mental illness. Excluding mental illness as a legitimate reason to receive EAS has been framed as discriminating against people with mental illness.

We examine whether approval or opposition to psychiatric EAS are related to stigma toward people with mental illness.

We asked a representative sample of the general population in Germany (N = 1515) whether they would approve of EAS for someone with severe, treatment-resistant mental illness. Stigma was assessed with the Value-Based Stigma Inventory (VASI), addressing rejection of people with mental illness in relation to different personal values.

A total of 19% of the German population approved of psychiatric EAS. Higher stigma scores were associated with greater approval of EAS (Spearman rank correlation coefficient, 0.28; P < 0.001). This association held true when controlling for sociodemographic variables. It was strongest for stigma related to perceived threats to one's security, reputation and meritocratic values.

Our results highlight that, although opposing psychiatric EAS is sometimes framed as discriminatory, approval of psychiatric EAS might also carry hidden, stigmatising motives. To avoid any unintended negative consequences for people with severe, treatment-resistant mental illness, any legislation on psychiatric EAS needs to be crafted with particular caution.

Computational models offer promising potential for personalised treatment of psychiatric diseases. For their clinical deployment, fairness must be evaluated alongside accuracy. Fairness requires predictive models to not unfairly disadvantage specific demographic groups. Failure to assess model fairness prior to use risks perpetuating healthcare inequalities. Despite its importance, empirical investigation of fairness in predictive models for psychiatry remains scarce.

To evaluate fairness in prediction models for development of psychosis and functional outcome.

Using data from the PRONIA study, we examined fairness in 13 published models for prediction of transition to psychosis (n = 11) and functional outcome (n = 2) in people at clinical high risk for psychosis or with recent-onset depression. Using accuracy equality, predictive parity, false-positive error rate balance and false-negative error rate balance, we evaluated relevant fairness aspects for the demographic attributes ‘gender’ and ‘educational attainment’ and compared them with the fairness of clinicians’ judgements.

Our findings indicate systematic bias towards assigning less favourable outcomes to individuals with lower educational attainment in both prediction models and clinicians’ judgements, resulting in higher false-positive rates in 7 of 11 models for transition to psychosis. Interestingly, the bias patterns observed in algorithmic predictions were not significantly more pronounced than those in clinicians’ predictions.

Educational bias was present in algorithmic and clinicians’ predictions, assuming more favourable outcomes for individuals with higher educational level (years of education). This bias might lead to increased stigma and psychosocial burden in patients with lower educational attainment and suboptimal psychosis prevention in those with higher educational attainment.

From a global perspective, eating disorders are increasingly common, probably because of societal transformation and improved detection. However, research on the impact of migration on the development of eating disorders is scarce, and previously reported results are conflicting.

To explore if eating disorder symptom prevalence varies according to birth region, parents’ birth region and neighbourhood characteristics, and analyse if the observed patterns match the likelihood of being in specialist treatment.

This study uses data from a large population-based health survey (N = 47 662) among adults in Stockholm, Sweden. A general linear model for complex samples, including adjustment for gender and age, was used to explore self-reported eating disorder symptoms. Odds ratios were calculated for individual symptoms.

Eating disorder symptoms are substantially more common in individuals born abroad, especially for migrants from a non-European country. This holds true for all surveyed symptoms, including restrictive eating (odds ratio 5.5, 95% CI 4.5–6.7), compensatory vomiting (odds ratio 6.1, 95% CI 4.6–8.0), loss-of-control eating (odds ratio 2.6, 95% CI 2.3–3.1) and preoccupation with food (odds ratio 2.3, 95% CI 1.9–2.8). Likewise, symptoms are more common in individuals with both parents born abroad and individuals living in districts with a high percentage of migrant residents. A gap exists between district-level symptom scores and the likelihood of being in specialist eating disorder treatment.

These findings call for oversight of current outreach strategies, and highlight the need for efforts to reduce stigma and increase eating disorder symptom recognition in broader groups.

The recent World Health Organization (WHO) blueprint for dementia research and Lancet Commission on ending stigma and discrimination in mental health has identified a gap around dementia-related measures of stigma and discrimination that can be used in different cultural, language and regional contexts.

We aimed to characterise experiences of discrimination, and report initial psychometric properties of a new tool to capture these experiences, among a global sample of people living with dementia.

We analysed data from 704 people living with dementia who took part in a global survey from 33 different countries and territories. Psychometric properties were examined, including internal consistency and construct validity.

A total of 83% of participants reported discrimination in one or more areas of life, and this was similar across WHO Regions. The exploratory factor analysis factor loadings and scree plot supported a unidimensional structure for the Discrimination and Stigma Scale Ultra Short for People Living with Dementia (DISCUS-Dementia). The instrument demonstrated excellent internal consistency, with most of the construct validity hypotheses being confirmed and qualitative responses demonstrating face validity.

Our analyses suggest that the DISCUS-Dementia performs well with a global sample of people living with dementia. This scale can be integrated into large-scale studies to understand factors associated with stigma and discrimination. It can also provide an opportunity for a structured discussion around stigma and discrimination experiences important to people living with dementia, as well as planning psychosocial services and initiatives to reduce stigma and discrimination.

Acute behavioural disturbance (ABD) is a controversial descriptor for presentations of severe agitation, aggression and physiological compromise.

To characterise the use of ABD-related terms in the electronic record of a large UK provider of mental health services during 2006–2021.

The free text of all records relating to patient contacts with acute assessment mental health teams during 2006–2021 were searched for references to ABD. Identified text was coded for context of use and presence of clinical features of ABD described in the literature. Poisson regression was used to analyse differences in rates of use over time and between demographic groups.

Mentions of ABD increased by an average of 1.12 (95% confidence interval (CI), 1.08–1.17) per year, with the greatest increase from 2019 to 2021. Black people were more than twice as likely as White people to have reference to ABD included in their assessments (rate: 2.4/1000 (95% CI 1.8–3.1) in Black people compared with 1.0/1000 (95% CI 0.8–1.3) in White people). The clinical characteristics in notes describing a current presentation of ABD rarely corresponded to those included in UK medical guidelines on ABD.

The term ABD in mental health notes appears to often, but not exclusively, be a synonym for severe agitation and conveys little meaning beyond this. However, the term's connection to a literature emphasising the high risk of physical health collapse and need for urgent treatment means that its disproportionate use in Black people may contribute to existing racial inequalities in the use of coercive measures during crisis presentations.