Identifying Mental Disorders in Primary Care: Diagnostic Accuracy of the Connected Mind Fast Check (CMFC) Electronic Screen

Workplace Deceptions During the Pandemic: Differences in Conspiracy Beliefs, Psychological Functioning, and Covid-19 Experiences

The global pandemic has disrupted virtually all countries on health, psychological functioning, and economies, to name a few. Accurate information has also fallen victim to the pandemic, which has been rife with misinformation and conspiracy theories. The current study investigated Covid-19 deceptions related to employment. With complete anonymity via MTurk, 389 participants from the United States rated their likelihood of deception regarding hypothetical four workplace scenarios. The first set of analyses examined differences between high and low risk of deceptions for each scenario based on participants' self-appraisals. The largest differences were found for general conspiracy beliefs and affective disorders, specifically major depression and generalized anxiety. The second set of analyses focused across the workplace scenarios on two operationalized groups with Likely-Deceptive (n = 189) vastly outnumbering Likely-Genuine (n = 55). Personal experiences with Covid-19 dramatically increased deceptions. Testing positive for Covid-19 increased the odds of being in the Likely-Deceptive by twelve-fold. Two discriminant models examined cognitive misbeliefs and psychological functioning. When both were combined, depression and Covid-19 misinformation produced the strongest structure coefficients followed closely by general conspiracy beliefs and generalized anxiety. The far-ranging implications of these findings are discussed.

Nurse practitioner educational preparation and confidence related to managing antipsychotic medications and associated drug-induced movement disorders

BACKGROUND

Antipsychotic medications (APMs) have been used to treat multiple psychiatric disorders for decades. The conditions to use these medications have expanded from primarily psychotic disorders to Food and Drug Administration-approved uses as first-line mood stabilizers in bipolar disorder and adjunctive pharmacotherapy in unipolar depression. Antipsychotic medications can have serious side effects, including drug-induced movement disorders (DIMDs). Nurse practitioners (NPs) in non-psychiatric-mental health specialties are increasingly managing psychotropic medication regimes. There is a void in peer-reviewed literature capturing the scope of NPs managing APMs, such as whether they received training to prescribe and manage risks of APM, and if so, what type (e.g., continuing education, attending conferences, consulting), and their confidence assessing and managing DIMDs.

PURPOSE

To describe the scope of NP management, knowledge, and confidence related to APMs and associated risks of DIMDs.

METHODOLOGY

Nonexperimental, descriptive, cross-sectional survey. Participants ( n = 400) recruited through a professional association membership portal.

RESULTS

Nearly two-thirds of participants reported managing APMs (64%) and receiving training to prescribe and manage risks of APMs (63%). More than half (54%) reported they received training to do so in their NP education program. Thirty-five percent of participants indicated they were either completely (6%) or fairly (29%) confident, whereas most (65%) endorsed being somewhat (26%), slightly (20%), or not (19%) confident in assessing and managing DIMDs.

CONCLUSIONS/IMPLICATIONS

Opportunities exist to broaden NP education in managing APMs and associated risks of DIMDs.

The Current State and Validity of Digital Assessment Tools for Psychiatry: Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Given the role digital technologies are likely to play in the future of mental health care, there is a need for a comprehensive appraisal of the current state and validity (ie, screening or diagnostic accuracy) of digital mental health assessments.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this review is to explore the current state and validity of question-and-answer-based digital tools for diagnosing and screening psychiatric conditions in adults.

METHODS

This systematic review was based on the Population, Intervention, Comparison, and Outcome framework and was carried out in accordance with the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, ASSIA, Web of Science Core Collection, CINAHL, and PsycINFO were systematically searched for articles published between 2005 and 2021. A descriptive evaluation of the study characteristics and digital solutions and a quantitative appraisal of the screening or diagnostic accuracy of the included tools were conducted. Risk of bias and applicability were assessed using the revised tool for the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2.

RESULTS

A total of 28 studies met the inclusion criteria, with the most frequently evaluated conditions encompassing generalized anxiety disorder, major depressive disorder, and any depressive disorder. Most of the studies used digitized versions of existing pen-and-paper questionnaires, with findings revealing poor to excellent screening or diagnostic accuracy (sensitivity=0.32-1.00, specificity=0.37-1.00, area under the receiver operating characteristic curve=0.57-0.98) and a high risk of bias for most of the included studies.

CONCLUSIONS

The field of digital mental health tools is in its early stages, and high-quality evidence is lacking.

INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID)

RR2-10.2196/25382.