Empirical evidence indicates a significant bidirectional association between mental disorders and physical diseases, but the prospective impact of men-tal disorders on clinical outcomes of physical diseases has not been comprehensively outlined. In this PRISMA- and COSMOS-E-compliant umbrella review, we searched PubMed, PsycINFO, Embase, and Joanna Briggs Institute Database of Systematic Reviews and Implementation Reports, up to March 15, 2022, to identify systematic reviews with meta-analysis that examined the prospective association between any mental disorder and clinical outcomes of physical diseases. Primary outcomes were disease-specific mortality and all-cause mortality. Secondary outcomes were disease-specific incidence, functioning and/or disability, symptom severity, quality of life, recurrence or progression, major cardiac events, and treatment-related outcomes. Additional inclusion criteria were further applied to primary studies. Random effect models were employed, along with I2 statistic, 95% prediction intervals, small-study effects test, excess significance bias test, and risk of bias (ROBIS) assessment. Associations were classified into five credibility classes of evidence (I to IV and non-significant) according to established criteria, complemented by sensitivity and subgroup analyses to examine the robustness of the main analysis. Statistical analysis was performed using a new package for conducting umbrella reviews (https://metaumbrella.org). Population attributable fraction (PAF) and generalized impact fraction (GIF) were then calculated for class I-III associations. Forty-seven systematic reviews with meta-analysis, encompassing 251 non-overlapping primary studies and reporting 74 associations, were included (68% were at low risk of bias at the ROBIS assessment). Altogether, 43 primary outcomes (disease-specific mortality: n=17; all-cause mortality: n=26) and 31 secondary outcomes were investigated. Although 72% of associations were statistically significant (p<0.05), only two showed convincing (class I) evidence: that between depressive disorders and all-cause mortality in patients with heart failure (hazard ratio, HR=1.44, 95% CI: 1.26-1.65), and that between schizophrenia and cardiovascular mortality in patients with cardiovascular diseases (risk ratio, RR=1.54, 95% CI: 1.36-1.75). Six associations showed highly suggestive (class II) evidence: those between depressive disorders and all-cause mortality in patients with diabetes mellitus (HR=2.84, 95% CI: 2.00-4.03) and with kidney failure (HR=1.41, 95% CI: 1.31-1.51); that between depressive disorders and major cardiac events in patients with myocardial infarction (odds ratio, OR=1.52, 95% CI: 1.36-1.70); that between depressive disorders and dementia in patients with diabetes mellitus (HR=2.11, 95% CI: 1.77-2.52); that between alcohol use disorder and decompensated liver cirrhosis in patients with hepatitis C (RR=3.15, 95% CI: 2.87-3.46); and that between schizophrenia and cancer mortality in patients with cancer (standardized mean ratio, SMR=1.74, 95% CI: 1.41-2.15). Sensitivity/subgroup analyses confirmed these results. The largest PAFs were 30.56% (95% CI: 27.67-33.49) for alcohol use disorder and decompensated liver cirrhosis in patients with hepatitis C, 26.81% (95% CI: 16.61-37.67) for depressive disorders and all-cause mortality in patients with diabetes mellitus, 13.68% (95% CI: 9.87-17.58) for depressive disorders and major cardiac events in patients with myocardial infarction, 11.99% (95% CI: 8.29-15.84) for schizophrenia and cardiovascular mortality in patients with cardiovascular diseases, and 11.59% (95% CI: 9.09-14.14) for depressive disorders and all-cause mortality in patients with kidney failure. The GIFs confirmed the preventive capacity of these associations. This umbrella review demonstrates that mental disorders increase the risk of a poor clinical outcome in several physical diseases. Prevention targeting mental disorders - particularly alcohol use disorders, depressive disorders, and schizophrenia - can reduce the incidence of adverse clinical outcomes in people with physical diseases. These findings can inform clinical practice and trans-speciality preventive approaches cutting across psychiatric and somatic medicine.

There is mixed evidence on the link between autism spectrum disorder (ASD) and diabetes. We conducted the first systematic review/meta-analysis on their association. Based on a pre-registered protocol (PROSPERO: CRD42021261114), we searched Pubmed, Ovid, and Web of Science databases up to 6 December 2021, with no language/type of document restrictions. We assessed study quality using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS). We included 24 studies (total: 3427,773 individuals; 237,529 with ASD and 92,832 with diabetes) in the systematic review and 20 in the meta-analysis (mean stars number on the NOS: 5.89/10). There was a significant association, albeit characterized by significant heterogeneity, when pooling unadjusted OR (1.535, 95% CI = 1.109¿2.126), which remained significant when restricting the analysis to children and type 2 diabetes, but became non-significant when considering adjusted ORs (OR: 1.528, 95% CI = 0.954¿2.448). No significant prospective association was found (n = 2) on diabetes predicting ASD (HR: 1.232, 0.826¿11.837). Therefore, the association between ASD and diabetes is likely confounded by demographic and clinical factors that should be systematically investigated in future studies.

We mapped the evidence on the type and strength of associations between a broad range of mental and physical conditions in children and adolescents, by carrying out an umbrella review, i.e., a quantitative synthesis of previous systematic reviews and meta-analyses. We also assessed to which extent the links between mental and physical conditions vary across disorders or, by contrast, are transdiagnostic. Based on a pre-established protocol, we retained 45 systematic reviews/meta-analyses, encompassing around 12.5 million of participants. In analyses limited to the most rigorous estimates, we found evidence for the following associations: ADHD-asthma, ADHD-obesity, and depression-asthma. A transdiagnostic association was confirmed between asthma and anxiety/ASD/depression/bipolar disorder, between obesity and ADHD/ASD/depression, and between dermatitis and ASD/ADHD. We conclude that obesity and allergic conditions are likely to be associated with mental disorders in children and adolescents. Our results can help clinicians explore potential links between mental and physical conditions in children/adolescent and provide a road map for future studies aimed at shading light on the underlying factors.

Background The COVID-19 pandemic has altered daily routines and family functioning, led to closing schools, and dramatically limited social interactions worldwide. Measuring its impact on mental health of vulnerable children and adolescents is crucial. Methods The Collaborative Outcomes study on Health and Functioning during Infection Times (COH-FIT ¿ www.coh-fit.com) is an on-line anonymous survey, available in 30 languages, involving >230 investigators from 49 countries supported by national/international professional associations. COH-FIT has thee waves (until the pandemic is declared over by the WHO, and 6¿18 months plus 24¿36 months after its end). In addition to adults, COH-FIT also includes adolescents (age 14¿17 years), and children (age 6¿13 years), recruited via non-probability/snowball and representative sampling and assessed via self-rating and parental rating. Non-modifiable/modifiable risk factors/treatment targets to inform prevention/intervention programs to promote health and prevent mental and physical illness in children and adolescents will be generated by COH-FIT. Co-primary outcomes are changes in well-being (WHO-5) and a composite psychopathology P-Score. Multiple behavioral, family, coping strategy and service utilization factors are also assessed, including functioning and quality of life. Results Up to June 2021, over 13,000 children and adolescents from 59 countries have participated in the COH-FIT project, with representative samples from eleven countries. Limitations Cross-sectional and anonymous design. Conclusions Evidence generated by COH-FIT will provide an international estimate of the COVID-19 effect on children's, adolescents¿ and families¿, mental and physical health, well-being, functioning and quality of life, informing the formulation of present and future evidence-based interventions and policies to minimize adverse effects of the present and future pandemics on youth.

Objective This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to (1) determine the accuracies of a broad range of screening tools for ADHD in children and adolescents and (2) compare the diagnostic accuracy of tools between population-based and clinical/high-risk samples, and across reporters. Method MEDLINE, PsycINFO, EMBASE and PubMed were searched up until February 20th, 2020 with no language restrictions. Studies reporting diagnostic accuracy of a screening tool against a diagnosis of ADHD in children <18 years were eligible for inclusion. Meta-analyses were undertaken to provide pooled estimates of the area under the curve (AUC), and sensitivity and specificity of groups of measures. Results Seventy-five studies published between 1985 and 2021 reporting on 41 screening tools that were grouped into four categories (ASEBA, DSM-IV symptom scales, SDQ, and Other Scales) were retained. The pooled AUC for studies using a combined ADHD symptoms score was 0.82 (95% CI 0.78-0.86), although this varied considerably across reporters (0.67-0.92) and populations (0.60-0.95). None of the measures met minimal standards for acceptable sensitivity (0.8) and specificity (0.8). Conclusion Most tools have excellent overall diagnostic accuracy as indicated by the AUC. However, a single measure, completed by a single reporter is unlikely to have sufficient sensitivity and specificity for clinical use or population screening.

Background: . High-quality comprehensive data on short-/long-term physical/mental health effects of the COVID-19 pandemic are needed. Methods: . The Collaborative Outcomes study on Health and Functioning during Infection Times (COH-FIT) is an international, multi-language (n=30) project involving >230 investigators from 49 countries/territories/regions, endorsed by national/international professional associations. COH-FIT is a multi-wave, on-line anonymous, cross-sectional survey [wave 1: 04/2020 until the end of the pandemic, 12 months waves 2/3 starting 6/24 months threreafter] for adults, adolescents (14-17), and children (6-13), utilizing non-probability/snowball and representative sampling. COH-FIT aims to identify non-modifiable/modifiable risk factors/treatment targets to inform prevention/intervention programs to improve social/health outcomes in the general population/vulnerable subgrous during/after COVID-19. In adults, co-primary outcomes are change from pre-COVID-19 to intra-COVID-19 in well-being (WHO-5) and a composite psychopathology P-Score. Key secondary outcomes are a P-extended score, global mental and physical health. Secondary outcomes include health-service utilization/functioning, treatment adherence, functioning, symptoms/behaviors/emotions, substance use, violence, among others. Results: . Starting 04/26/2020, up to 14/07/2021 >151,000 people from 155 countries/territories/regions and six continents have participated. Representative samples of ¿1,000 adults have been collected in 15 countries. Overall, 43.0% had prior physical disorders, 16.3% had prior mental disorders, 26.5% were health care workers, 8.2% were aged ¿65 years, 19.3% were exposed to someone infected with COVID-19, 76.1% had been in quarantine, and 2.1% had been COVID 19-positive. Limitations: . Cross-sectional survey, preponderance of non-representative participants. Conclusions: . Results from COH-FIT will comprehensively quantify the impact of COVID-19, seeking to identify high-risk groups in need for acute and long-term intervention, and inform evidence-based health policies/strategies during this/future pandemics.

Top-tier evidence on the safety/tolerability of 80 medications in children/adolescents with mental disorders has recently been reviewed in this jour-nal. To guide clinical practice, such data must be combined with evidence on efficacy and acceptability. Besides medications, psychosocial inter-ventions and brain stimulation techniques are treatment options for children/adolescents with mental disorders. For this umbrella review, we systematically searched network meta-analyses (NMAs) and meta-analyses (MAs) of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating 48 medications, 20 psychosocial interventions, and four brain stimulation techniques in children/adolescents with 52 different mental disorders or groups of mental disorders, reporting on 20 different efficacy/acceptability outcomes. Co-primary outcomes were disease-specific symptom reduction and all-cause discontinuation ("acceptability"). We included 14 NMAs and 90 MAs, reporting on 15 mental disorders or groups of mental disorders. Overall, 21 medications outperformed placebo regarding the co-primary outcomes, and three psychosocial interventions did so (while seven outperformed waiting list/no treatment). Based on the meta-analytic evidence, the most convincing efficacy profile emerged for amphetamines, methylphenidate and, to a smaller extent, behavioral therapy in attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder; aripiprazole, risperidone and several psychosocial interventions in autism; risperidone and behavioral interventions in disruptive behavior disorders; several antipsychotics in schizophrenia spectrum disorders; fluoxetine, the combination of fluoxetine and cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT), and interpersonal therapy in depression; aripiprazole in mania; fluoxetine and group CBT in anxiety disorders; fluoxetine/selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, CBT, and behavioral therapy with exposure and response prevention in obsessive-compulsive disorder; CBT in post-traumatic stress disorder; imipramine and alarm behavioral intervention in enuresis; behavioral therapy in encopresis; and family therapy in anorexia nervosa. Results from this umbrella review of interventions for mental disorders in children/adolescents provide evidence-based information for clinical decision making.

Background: The use of electronic interventions to improve reading is becoming a common resource. This systematic review aims to describe the main characteristics of randomized controlled trials or quasi-experimental studies that have used these tools to improve first-language reading, in order to highlight the features of the most reliable studies and guide future research. Methods: The whole procedure followed the PRISMA guidelines, and the protocol was registered before starting the process (doi: 10.17605/OSF.IO/CKM4N). Searches in Scopus, PubMed, Web of Science and an institutional reference aggregator (Unika) yielded 6,230 candidate articles. After duplicate removal, screening, and compliance of eligibility criteria, 55 studies were finally included. Results: They were research studies on improving first-language reading, both in children and adults, and including a control group. Thirty-three different electronic tools were employed, most of them in English, and studies were very diverse in sample size, length of intervention, and control tasks. Risk of bias was analyzed with the PEDro scale, and all studies had a medium or low risk. However, risk of bias due to conflicts of interest could not be evaluated in most studies, since they did not include a statement on this issue. Conclusion: Future research on this topic should include randomized intervention and control groups, with sample sizes over 65 per group, interventions longer than 15 h, and a proper disclosure.

Objective Current research does not provide a clear explanation for why some patients with Parkinson¿s Disease (PD) develop psychotic symptoms. The `aberrant salience hypothesis¿ of psychosis has been influential and proposes that dopaminergic dysregulation leads to inappropriate attribution of salience to irrelevant/non-informative stimuli, facilitating the formation of hallucinations and delusions. The aim of this study is to investigate whether non-motivational salience is altered in PD patients and possibly linked to the development of psychotic symptoms. Methods We investigated salience processing in 14 PD patients with psychotic symptoms, 23 PD patients without psychotic symptoms and 19 healthy controls. All patients were on dopaminergic medication for their PD. We examined emotional salience using a visual oddball fMRI paradigm that has been used to investigate early stages of schizophrenia spectrum psychosis, controlling for resting cerebral blood flow as assessed with arterial spin labelling fMRI. Results We found significant differences between patient groups in brain responses to emotional salience. PD patients with psychotic symptoms had enhanced brain responses in the striatum, dopaminergic midbrain, hippocampus and amygdala compared to patients without psychotic symptoms. PD patients with psychotic symptoms showed significant correlations between the levels of dopaminergic drugs they were taking and BOLD signalling, as well as psychotic symptom scores. Conclusion Our study suggests that enhanced signalling in the striatum, dopaminergic midbrain, the hippocampus and amygdala is associated with the development of psychotic symptoms in PD, in line with that proposed in the `aberrant salience hypothesis¿ of psychosis in schizophrenia.

In psychiatry, as in any other medical specialty, the clinician collects information from the patient¿s anamnesis, clinical observation, and diagnostic tests; evaluates these data; and makes a diagnosis. The most common manuals used to assess a patient¿s mental disease according to his or her symptoms are the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) and the International Classification of Diseases (ICD). This chapter focuses on the dialogue that philosophy and psychiatry have held for decades to achieve a better understanding of dissociative identity disorder (DID). The outcome of this dialogue is the expression of the diagnostic criteria for DID, as well as other dissociative disorders, in the medical manuals. Thus, we first analyze the evolution of DID across the different versions of ICD and DSM. We then show that the characterization of DID and other dissociative disorders is a lively debate that is far from being settled. We demonstrate that the core of this debate is the understanding of person after John Locke¿s philosophy: a person is defined by the apparent expression of consciousness and memories. This leads to what we have termed a primary conceptual dissociation: the mental qualities of the person are dissociated from the body. We propose an alternative account based on the dynamic nature of identity and the understanding of person as a mind¿body unity. We hope that our proposal, which results from the interdisciplinary dialogue between psychiat