Mental health problems represent a growing global concern. This has intensified since the coronavirus pandemic and is also partly due to greater awareness of the extent of mental health problems and the lack of attention they have received over time. In many high-income countries, increases in service provision have been accompanied by efforts to increase the mental health literacy of the general population. One example of this in Australia, is the mental health first aid training program which is informed by the mental health first aid guidelines created to promote mental health literacy among the general population, reduce stigma, and enable lay people to provide timely support, and facilitate access to health services for a person developing a mental health problem or in a mental health crisis.
Between March 2020 and May 2023, a consortium of researchers from Australia, Argentina and Chile carried out the cultural adaptation of five guidelines (drinking problems, depression, suicide risk, trauma, and psychosis) using the Delphi consensus methodology. Health professionals with expertise in each of the topics and people with lived experience (their own or as informal caregivers) from Argentina and Chile were grouped into separate panels. Over two survey rounds, they evaluated the items from the Australian guidelines and gave their opinion on the importance of their inclusion in the local guidelines. Additionally, they suggested items not included in the Australian guidelines.
This report presents the details of the methodology used and the most significant results of each of the five adapted guidelines, particularly, those of relevance to the Argentinian and Chilean context. The general acceptance of the role of the first aider stands out as an important outcome. However, in comparison to Australia, the first aider’s role was reduced and the health professional role was expanded. Self-help recommendations were typically not endorsed by local experts, suggesting skepticism toward these strategies. Other specific recommendations for each of the guidelines are described and analyzed in this report.
A study of the implementation of training courses based on these guidelines is required to make the necessary adaptations and determine their local usefulness.
Los problemas de salud mental en la comunidad representan una preocupación global creciente, intensificada desde la pandemia por coronavirus y gracias a una mayor conciencia respecto de su extensión y del bajo nivel de atención que recibieron a lo largo del tiempo. En Australia se crearon las primeras guías de primeros auxilios en salud mental para promover un mayor conocimiento de temas de salud mental en la población general, brindar apoyo oportuno, facilitar el acceso a los servicios de salud por esta problemática, y disminuir el estigma asociado al padecimiento mental.
Un consorcio de investigadores de Australia, Argentina y Chile, entre marzo de 2020 y mayo de 2023, realizó la adaptación cultural de cinco guías (consumo problemático de alcohol, depresión, riesgo de suicidio, trauma, y psicosis) siguiendo la metodología de consenso Delphi. Profesionales expertos en cada uno de los temas y personas con experiencia vivida  (propia o como cuidadores informales) conformaron sendos paneles con miembros de Argentina y de Chile. En dos rondas de consulta evaluaron los ítems provenientes de las guías de Australia y opinaron sobre su pertinencia para formar parte de las guías locales. Adicionalmente, sugirieron ítems que no estaban contemplados en las guías australianas.
El presente reporte presenta el detalle de la metodología empleada y los resultados más significativos de cada una de las cinco guías adaptadas y, particularmente, su aplicabilidad para Argentina y Chile. Sobresale la aceptación general del rol del asistente de primeros auxilios en salud mental, aunque también con limitaciones en el rol y funciones en favor del privilegio de profesionales de la salud. Las recomendaciones de auto-ayuda fueron mayoritariamente no aceptadas por los expertos locales, sugiriendo desconfianza respecto de estas estrategias. Otras recomendaciones específicas para cada una de las guías se describen y analizan en este reporte.
Se requiere un estudio de la implementación de la capacitación en base a estas guías para realizar ulteriores adaptaciones y determinar su utilidad local.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to conduct a systematic review of the measurement properties and methodological quality of stigma assessment tools designed for breast cancer patients. The aim was to provide clinical medical staff with a foundation for selecting high-quality assessment tools.
METHODS: A comprehensive computer search was carried out across various databases, including SinoMed, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Wanfang Database, China Science and Technology Journal Database(VIP), Embase, PubMed, Web of Science, The Cochrane Library, and Scopus, which were searched from the inception of the databases until March 20, 2023. Literature screening and data extraction were performed independently by two researchers, adhering to predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria. The assessment tools were evaluated using the Consensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) systematic evaluation guidelines.
RESULTS: In the final analysis, a total of 9 assessment tools were included. However, none of these tools addressed measurement error, cross-cultural validity, criterion validity, and responsiveness. Following the COSMIN guidelines, BCSS and CSPDS were assigned to Class A recommendations, while the remaining tools received Class B recommendations.
CONCLUSIONS: The BCSS and CSPDS scales demonstrated comprehensive assessment in terms of their measurement characteristics, exhibiting good methodological quality, measurement attribute quality, and supporting evidence. Therefore, it is recommended to utilize these scales for evaluating breast cancer stigma. However, further validation is required for the remaining assessment tools.

暂无摘要。

Obesity is becoming recognized as a complex, chronic medical condition. However, the dominant treatment narrative remains that goal weight can be achieved by eating less, moving more using willpower, placing responsibility for change on the person with obesity (PwO). This study evaluated the impact of revising this narrative, to viewing obesity as a treatable medical condition, on internalized weight bias and perceived patient-provider relationship. PwO were recruited into an online study in which two videos were presented; the first showing a traditional doctor endorsing the eat less, move more approach, and the second showing a doctor describing obesity as a treatable medical condition. After each video participants were asked to imagine that they were being treated by that doctor and completed the Weight Bias Internalization Scale (WBIS) and the Patient-Health Care Provider Communication Scale (PHCPCS). A total of 61 PwO (52% response rate) completed the protocol. Compared to the traditional narrative video, the revised narrative video resulted in significant reductions in WBIS scores and significant increases in the PHCPCS scores and was preferred by participants. Within the context of this small-scale study evidence supports that the revised narrative promoting obesity as a complex, chronic but treatable medical condition that is not the result of personal failure has a positive impact on the perceived patient-provider relationship and is associated with reductions in internalized weight bias. This evidence supports the need to help PwO reframe obesity from a personal failure to a legitimate medical condition worthy of care.

The principal limitations of the terms NAFLD and NASH are the reliance on exclusionary confounder terms and the use of potentially stigmatising language. This study set out to determine if content experts and patient advocates were in favour of a change in nomenclature and/or definition. A modified Delphi process was led by three large pan-national liver associations. The consensus was defined a priori as a supermajority (67%) vote. An independent committee of experts external to the nomenclature process made the final recommendation on the acronym and its diagnostic criteria. A total of 236 panellists from 56 countries participated in 4 online surveys and 2 hybrid meetings. Response rates across the 4 survey rounds were 87%, 83%, 83%, and 78%, respectively. Seventy-four percent of respondents felt that the current nomenclature was sufficiently flawed to consider a name change. The terms \"nonalcoholic\" and \"fatty\" were felt to be stigmatising by 61% and 66% of respondents, respectively. Steatotic liver disease was chosen as an overarching term to encompass the various aetiologies of steatosis. The term steatohepatitis was felt to be an important pathophysiological concept that should be retained. The name chosen to replace NAFLD was metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD). There was consensus to change the definition to include the presence of at least 1 of 5 cardiometabolic risk factors. Those with no metabolic parameters and no known cause were deemed to have cryptogenic steatotic liver disease. A new category, outside pure metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease, termed metabolic and alcohol related/associated liver disease (MetALD), was selected to describe those with metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease, who consume greater amounts of alcohol per week (140-350 g/wk and 210-420 g/wk for females and males, respectively). The new nomenclature and diagnostic criteria are widely supported and non-stigmatising, and can improve awareness and patient identification.

There is an ongoing debate on the change of terminology of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) to metabolic associated fatty liver disease (MAFLD). Experts from the Indian National Association for Study of the Liver (INASL) and the South Asian Association for Study of the Liver (SAASL) involved in diagnosing, managing, and preventing NAFLD met in March 2022 to deliberate if the name change from NAFLD to MAFLD is appropriate, as proposed by a group of experts who published a \"consensus\" statement in 2020. Proponents of name change to MAFLD opined that NAFLD does not reflect current knowledge, and the term MAFLD was suggested as a more appropriate overarching term. However, this \"consensus\" group which proposed the name change to MAFLD did not represent the views and opinions of gastroenterologists and hepatologists, as well as perceptions of patients across the globe, given the fact that change of nomenclature for any disease entity is bound to have multidimensional impact on all aspects of patient care. This statement is the culmination of the participants\' combined efforts who presented recommendations on specific issues concerning the proposed name change. The recommendations were then circulated to all the core group members and updated based on a systematic literature search. Finally, all the members voted on them using the nominal voting technique as per the standard guidelines. The quality of evidence was adapted from the Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation system.

OBJECTIVE: To focus on the intersection of perception, diagnosis, stigma, and weight bias in the management of obesity and obtain consensus on actionable steps to improve care provided for persons with obesity.
METHODS: The American Association of Clinical Endocrinology (AACE) convened a consensus conference of interdisciplinary health care professionals to discuss the interplay between the diagnosis of obesity using adiposity-based chronic disease (ABCD) nomenclature and staging, weight stigma, and internalized weight bias (IWB) with development of actionable guidance to aid clinicians in mitigating IWB and stigma in that context.
RESULTS: The following affirmed and emergent concepts were proposed: (1) obesity is ABCD, and these terms can be used in differing ways to communicate; (2) classification categories of obesity should have improved nomenclature across the spectrum of body mass index (BMI) using ethnic-specific BMI ranges and waist circumference (WC); (3) staging the clinical severity of obesity based on the presence and severity of ABCD complications may reduce weight-centric contribution to weight stigma and IWB; (4) weight stigma and internalized bias are both drivers and complications of ABCD and can impair quality of life, predispose to psychological disorders, and compromise the effectiveness of therapeutic interventions; (5) the presence and of stigmatization and IWB should be assessed in all patients and be incorporated into the staging of ABCD severity; and (6) optimal care will necessitate increased awareness and the development of educational and interventional tools for health care professionals that address IWB and stigma.
CONCLUSIONS: The consensus panel has proposed an approach for integrating bias and stigmatization, psychological health, and social determinants of health in a staging system for ABCD severity as an aid to patient management. To effectively address stigma and IWB within a chronic care model for patients with obesity, there is a need for health care systems that are prepared to provide evidence-based, person-centered treatments; patients who understand that obesity is a chronic disease and are empowered to seek care and participate in behavioral therapy; and societies that promote policies and infrastructure for bias-free compassionate care, access to evidence-based interventions, and disease prevention.

The aim of this study was to generate a baseline database of print media reporting on alcohol and other drug (AOD) issues prior to the release of the Mindframe guidelines in March 2019. Specifically, to: (i) describe the content associated with media entries that focus on AOD use in Australian news media; (ii) determine how the media entries compare to several domains associated with recently developed Mindframe guidelines for publicly reporting on AOD; and (iii) identify content factors associated with different scores.
Media entries between July 2016 and June 2017 were searched for key AOD-related terms using the Australian and New Zealand Newsstream database. Two coding schemes were developed to rate a stratified sample of 50% of the media entries against the Mindframe guidelines. Associations between content and total comparison scores were determined using linear regression models.
Detailed coding of the 2007 articles identified as relevant for the current study indicated that a majority (67%) were focused on one of three substances: alcohol, cannabis or methamphetamine. Most of the entries were either law enforcement (22%) or criminal justice related (19%). Entries that focused on methamphetamine scored significantly lower than entries on alcohol when compared to the Mindframe guidelines, similarly entries focused on crime/justice-related topics scored significantly lower than entries focused on positive outcomes.
A disproportionate number of print media entries, particularly those related methamphetamine use, focused on crime or justice-related topics, potentially further contributing to stigma, and emphasising the legal consequences of AOD use.

The COVID-19 pandemic has required close examination of workforce-related stressors that over decades have contributed to widespread burnout, negative health outcomes, including mental health outcomes, and the loss of the well-educated professionals who are the future of the nursing profession. In the United States and globally, evidence points to factors known to diminish well-being, including inequities, issues of minority status, persistent discrimination, and demanding work environments. The American Academy of Nursing (AAN), dedicated to organizational excellence, nursing leadership and evidence-based policy, develops statements reflecting its mission and those of its nursing affiliates and corporate member, The American Nurses Association. Within nursing, despite the efforts of its members toward advancement, professional fulfillment is often constrained by the systems in which nurses practice and workplace factors over which they have little control. Action by key organizations to initiate changes at systems levels in workplace safety, to increase professional mobility, and propel policies that increase access to health care resources could improve nurse well-being. This paper proposes recommendations from the AAN Expert Panels on Building Health Care System Excellence, Psychiatric Mental Health and Substance Use, and Global Health Expert Panels for the American Academy of Nursing to leverage related policy in the arenas of government and professional/healthcare organizations. Transforming health care work environments and advancing nurse well-being and equity can be accomplished through key, innovative policy changes. These will be achieved through collaboration among associations, organizations, nonprofit groups, and with the public and the media.

The new NICE guideline for myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS), published in October 2021, makes significant changes in treatment recommendations. It acknowledges the complexity of this chronic medical condition, which always impacts quality of life and can be profoundly disabling, recognising the prejudice and stigma that people with ME/CFS often experience in the absence of any specific diagnostic test. The guideline outlines steps for accurate diagnosis, recognising post-exertional malaise as a core symptom; importantly, ME/CFS can now be diagnosed after just 3 months in a bid to improve long-term health outcomes. It recommends the need for individual, tailored management by a multi-disciplinary team, ensuring that the wellbeing of the individual is paramount. The guideline makes clear that any programme based on fixed incremental increases in physical activity or exercise, for example, graded exercise therapy (GET), should not be offered as a treatment for ME/CFS and emphasises that cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) should only be offered as a supportive intervention. Because of the rigorous methodology required by NICE Committee review and the inclusion of the testimony of people with lived experience as committee members, this guideline will influence the future diagnosis and management of ME/CFS in the UK and beyond.