METHODS: Longitudinal data from two different sources were analysed: a pre-post study of an online parenting programme conducted across six countries - the ePLH Evaluation Study, and a prospective cohort study in the United States - LONGSCAN. Cross-lagged panel model on parenting stress and child maltreatment was used in each dataset.
RESULTS: Based on repeatedly measured data of 484 caregivers in the ePLH study across five time points (every two weeks), we found that parenting stress at an earlier time point predicted later child maltreatment (IRR = 1.14, 95 % CI: 1.10,1.18). In addition, the occurrence of child maltreatment was associated with higher subsequent short-term parenting stress (IRR = 1.04, 95 % CI: 1.01,1.08) and thus could form a vicious circle. In the LONGSCAN analysis with 772 caregivers who were followed up from child age of 6 to child age of 16, we also found parenting stress at an earlier time point predicted later child maltreatment (β = 0.11, 95 % CI: 0.01,0.20), but did not observe an association between child maltreatment and subsequent long-term parenting stress.
LIMITATIONS: Potential information bias on the measurements.
CONCLUSIONS: This study provides evidence for a bidirectional temporal relationship between parenting stress and child maltreatment, which should be considered in parenting intervention programmes.
METHODS: Chi-square tests were used for initial screening to select only those variables which would show an initial significance. Risk Ratios (RR) were calculated, and a Multiple Backward Stepwise Linear Regression Analysis (MBSLRA) was followed with those variables given significant results at screening and with the presence of distress or depression or the lack of both of them.
RESULTS: The most important risk factors for depression were female (RR = 1.59-5.49) and non-binary gender (RR = 1.56-7.41), unemployment (RR = 1.41-6.57), not working during lockdowns (RR = 1.43-5.79), bad general health (RR = 2.74-9.98), chronic somatic disorder (RR = 1.22-5.57), history of mental disorders (depression RR = 2.31-9.47; suicide attempt RR = 2.33-9.75; psychosis RR = 2.14-10.08; Bipolar disorder RR = 2.75-12.86), smoking status (RR = 1.15-5.31) and substance use (RR = 1.77-8.01). The risk factors for distress or depression that survived MBSLRA were younger age, being widowed, living alone, bad general health, being a carer, chronic somatic disorder, not working during lockdowns, being single, self-reported history of depression, bipolar disorder, self-harm, suicide attempts and of other mental disorders, smoking, alcohol, and substance use.
CONCLUSIONS: Targeted preventive interventions are crucial to safeguard the mental health of vulnerable groups, emphasizing the importance of diverse samples in future research.
LIMITATIONS: Online data collection may have resulted in the underrepresentation of certain population groups.
METHODS: The sample consisted of 7427 college students (56% female) who reported to be affiliated with Islam. Data on self-construal, social support, negative life-events, acceptability of suicide, suicidal ideation, and suicide attempts were collected with self-administered questionnaires.
RESULTS: Acceptability of suicide and the experience of negative life-events were positively, and perceived social support was negatively associated with suicidal ideation. Interdependent self-construal was negatively related to the acceptability of suicide and positively associated with perceived social support, implying a negative indirect effect on suicidal ideation although its direct effect was positive. The number of negative life-events was the strongest positive predictor of ever attempting suicide. The interdependent self-construal moderated the association of negative life-events with suicide attempts.
LIMITATIONS: Cross-sectional and self-report nature of the study were its major limitations. Participants may have suppressed their responses about suicide because of religious and legal reasons.
CONCLUSION: Remarkable similarities across 11 country samples emerged in the linkages between cultural and interpersonal factors with suicidality. Our findings highlight the value of a nuanced approach to suicidality, that can recognize the differences in the processes associated with suicidal ideation and suicide attempts, as well as the need to consider the interplay of a broad range of personal, interpersonal, and cultural influences.
METHOD: A systematic review and meta-analysis approach was adopted as per the PRISMA guidelines, targeting articles published in PubMed, Google Scholar and Scopus from January 2021 to March 30, 2021. The screening resulted in 82 papers.
RESULTS: The overall pooled depression prevalence among 201,953 respondents was 34% (95%CI, 29-38, 99.7%), with no significant differences observed between the cohorts, timelines, and regions (p > 0.05). Dominant risk factors found were fear of COVID-19 infection (13%), gender (i.e., females; 12%) and deterioration of underlying medical conditions (8.3%), regardless of the sub-groups. Specifically, fear of COVID-19 infection was the most reported risk factor among general population (k = 14) and healthcare workers (k = 8). Gender (k = 7) and increased workload (k = 7) were reported among healthcare workers whereas education disruption among students (k = 7).
LIMITATION: The review is limited to articles published in three electronic databases. Conclusion The pandemic has caused depression among the populations across Asia Pacific, specifically among the general population, healthcare workers and students. Immediate attention and interventions from the concerned authorities are needed in addressing this issue.