Transcultural Psychiatry最新文献

This article aims to show how incorrect ideas about COVID-19 were promoted by physicians in Brazil, contributing to a catastrophic response at the cost of hundreds of thousands of lives, and to examine the implications of this episode for the social studies of science, technology and medicine. The literature on the relationship between science and society takes two broad approaches, which are sometimes at odds with each other: (i) there is a traditional critique of science that points to unsupported claims of certainty and thus undue interference in general human affairs; (ii) there are many examples of attempts to undermine reasonable scientific claims, when they clash with economic and/or political interests of certain groups. Navigating those extremes is particularly critical in situations in which accurate knowledge is necessary for intervening in people's lives, as is the case in health-related issues. Determining who has actual epistemic expertise is a key factor in solving this conundrum. This became painfully clear during the unfolding of the COVID-19 pandemic, which highlighted the uncertainties of science in guiding decisions being made in real time, and provided opportunities for many forms of disinformation and conspiracy theories that hampered public health measures and promoted useless or even dangerous "treatments". This article discusses an instructive example of such developments in the chaotic response to the pandemic challenge in Brazil, which saw, among other unfortunate situations, physicians aligned with the denialist federal government advocating for unproven - or proven as ineffective - treatments and disseminating unfounded doubts about vaccines. Presumed expertise on the basis of professional training clearly did not translate into actual expertise in the necessary domains to ascertain the validity of such claims and scientific advice was overridden by ideology.

According to a naturalist conception of what counts as a disorder, conspiracy beliefs are pathological beliefs if they are the outcome of a cognitive dysfunction. In this article, I take issue with the view that it is pathological to believe a conspiracy theory. After reviewing several approaches to the aetiology of conspiracy beliefs, I find that no approach compels us to view conspiracy beliefs as the outcome of a dysfunction: a speaker's conspiracy beliefs can appear as implausible and unshakeable to an interpreter, but in a naturalist framework it is not pathological for the speaker to adopt and maintain such beliefs.

Polarization and turf-wars have characterized the COVID-19 response in the United States. While COVID-19 narratives can be binary and divisive, how people cared for each other throughout the first year of the pandemic is more nuanced. This article describes how and why constructs of fear, individualism, wellbeing, and personal risk-taking became imbued in behaviors that thwarted the risk of the collective. This work is based on informal conversations, public forums, and 86 in-depth interviews during the 2020 summer in a small tourist town in northwest Iowa. Some believed engaging in public health prevention was not their responsibility and instead privileged their personal enjoyment, finances, or mental health over others, de-emphasizing personal risk and stating God will protect them. Others were deeply committed to public health prevention, by staying home, masking, and social distancing. In both cases, people used shame to promote their views (e.g., shame on you for masking/unmasking!) as well as fear (e.g., I do/don't fear coronavirus because I am virtuous). However, most engaged in logics of care, navigating what public health precautions to follow to protect themselves and those they loved most. Yet, such decisions were navigated through a culture of individualism and ideals of personal responsibility that cultivated a mistrust in public health. Understanding how and why such individualism took hold in American publics is a crucial inflection point for policy-making as well as cultural interpretation of why and how people construct risk and responsibility.

We investigated the effectiveness of interventions provided by traditional healers for common mental disorders (CMDs) together with associated barriers and facilitators. Electronic databases including MEDLINE, APA Psych Info, Allied and Complementary Medicine, Embase, CINAHL, Social Science Citation Index, and Scopus were searched from inception until October 2021. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) assessing interventions by traditional healers for CMDs and qualitative and mixed-methods studies examining traditional healers and their attendees' views about the treatment of CMDs by traditional healers were included. Cochrane Risk of Bias Assessment tool (RoB-1) and Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) were used for the quality assessment of studies. A meta-analysis and thematic synthesis were conducted. Sixteen RCTs (1,132 participants) and 17 qualitative or mixed-methods studies (380 participants) were included. Improvement in symptoms was greater for interventions by traditional healers compared to control groups for both depression and anxiety. Subgroup analyses indicated that only "spiritual passe" interventions showed improvement in depression and anxiety, and participants with co-morbid anxiety and physical conditions showed improvement in anxiety. Facilitators to engaging with interventions by traditional healers were shared faith-based worldview exhibited by traditional healers and their attendees and perceived effectiveness of traditional healing. Stigma and concealing mental illness were found to be barriers not only to formal healthcare but also to traditional healers' services. Interventions by traditional healers such as "spiritual passe" are effective in improving CMDs. However, evidence is still limited due to the low quality of studies and lack of long-term evidence.

Although resilience has been identified as an important mediator of negative mental health outcomes among refugee populations, there are few culturally specific measures of resilience among such communities and no such measure among Somalis. In this study we aimed to develop a culturally appropriate measure of resilience specific to Somali adults in San Diego, as an example of a vulnerable refugee community. A community-based, exploratory sequential mixed method investigation was conducted via focus group discussions (n = 4), cognitive interviews (n = 4), and iterative survey adaptation. Somali refugee adults in San Diego (N = 183) were surveyed with this novel scale, a standardized measure of resilience, and assessments of depression, anxiety, and PTSD. Results were analyzed via correlation coefficients and multivariate linear regression modeling. Qualitative findings supported the inclusion of items addressing both barriers and facilitators of good mental health, which resulted in the development of the Somali Distress and Resilience Survey (SDRS). Linear regression analysis revealed that the SDRS demonstrated significant associations with symptoms of depression and PTSD, while the standardized measure of resilience did not demonstrate associations with any of the mental health outcomes assessed. The SDRS identified obstacles to resilience among Somali individuals, placing them at risk of developing negative mental health outcomes. Our novel measure also demonstrated more robust relationships with these outcomes than a standardized measure of resilience, suggesting greater utility of the adapted scale. However, the SDRS's development raises larger questions about the limitations of developing and comprehensively evaluating novel resilience measures in a community-based setting.

The Liberian civil wars led to widespread destruction and devastation for its individuals, communities, and economy. However, individuals' subjective trauma experiences and long-term psychological impact remain relatively understudied. This study aims to explore context-specific traumatic events and examine how risk and protective factors combine with traumas to influence trajectories of suffering and recovery over time. We conducted 43 semi-structured interviews with Liberian adults who were present during the Liberian civil wars, and we used line-by-line open coding, thematic analysis, and axial coding to analyze and contextualize the data. Eight key trauma themes emerged: Abuse (emotional, physical, and sexual), Captivity, Combat, Killings, Physical Illness, Resource Loss, Family Separation, and War Environment. The risk and protective factors that were reported as salient were: Age, Biological Sex, Socioeconomic Status, and Community Support. Further, key patterns emerged across interviews that indicated greater risk for long-term suffering: 1) exposure to multiple traumatic events, 2) certain types of traumatic events (like killing of a close family member), and 3) the combination of specific traumatic events and risk and protective factors (like older women witnessing the killing of their children). This study provides culturally relevant information on trauma, suffering, and resilience in post-conflict Liberia, with the aim of guiding the development of screening tools and targeted psychological interventions that improve well-being over time.

Community reaction to refugees and asylum-seekers is often gauged by attitude surveys that are not designed to overcome built-in bias. Questionnaires that do not account for context and background consequently yield results that misrepresent community attitudes and offer predictably negative responses to immigrant groups. Such surveys can alter public perception, fuel anti-refugee sentiment, and affect policy simply because of how they are constructed. This model survey among humanitarian aid-workers from nine Greek non-governmental organizations uses specific techniques designed to overcome these challenges by applying sample familiarity, non-inflammatory hypothesis-testing, educational question stems, intentional ordering of questions, and direct questioning rather than surrogate measures like statistical approximation. Respondents working in the refugee crisis in Greece demonstrate how empathy, education, and exposure to refugees serve to overcome the harmful stereotypes of outsiders as contributors to crime, terror, and social burden.

Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT) is an empirically supported psychotherapy that offers promise for the mental health of minoritised ethnic populations. Given the diversity of those presenting to inner-city services and barriers to accessing appropriate mental healthcare, we sought to develop a culturally syntonic ACT intervention for UK Vietnamese refugee communities in a practice-based partnership project between a National Health Service and local third-sector service in East London. The aim was to explore the feasibility, acceptability and impact of the adapted intervention to inform culturally inclusive clinical practice and future research. We outline key aspects of Vietnamese belief systems and culture, and consider how these might influence the optimisation of group-based ACT. We then present a mixed-method evaluation of the seven-session adapted ACT group for 11 participants (9 male and 5 female, aged between 44 and 73 years). Individual-level change analyses indicated clinically significant improvements in psychological flexibility for the minority of participants and a mixed pattern for impact on well-being. A thematic analysis and descriptive approach examined acceptability, feasibility and narratives of impact. Participants reported positive feedback on group experience, relevance and usefulness, and emergent themes indicate that the group facilitated key acceptance, commitment and behaviour-change processes, promoted social connections and increased engagement in meaningful life activities in relation to new perspectives and values-based action. Limitations are outlined, but overall, findings suggest preliminary support for the potential beneficial effect of the adapted ACT group as a feasible, culturally acceptable therapeutic approach for UK Vietnamese communities that is worthy of further investigation.

To support resilience in contexts of migration, a deeper understanding of the experiences of both receiving communities and migrants is required. Research on the impacts of migration on community life is limited in contexts with high internal migration (i.e., migrating within one's country of origin). Evidence suggests that cultural similarity, community relationships, and access to resources may be protective factors that could be leveraged to support the mental health of internal migrants. The current study uses data drawn from a sample of pregnant Peruvian women (N = 251), 87 of whom reported being internal migrants and 164 of whom reported being from the locale of the study (Lima, Perú). The aim was to better understand the social experience of internal migration for both local and migrant women. Inductive thematic analysis was used to examine migration experience and perceived impact of migration on community life. Internal migrants discussed three themes relative to their experiences: motivations, adjustment, and challenges. Experiences of women in receiving communities consisted of four themes related to migration: positive, negative, neutral, and mixed perceptions. Linguistic Inquiry and Word Count (LIWC-22) software was also used to assess sentiment towards migration. Across both analytic methods, migration motivations and perceptions were multifaceted and migrants reported a wide range of challenges before, during, and after migration. Findings indicated that attitudes toward migration are broadly positive, and that there is a more positive appraisal of migration's impact on the community life for internal as opposed to international migration.