Approximately 25% of people will be affected by a mental disorder at some stage in their life. Despite the prevalence and negative impacts of mental disorders, many people are not diagnosed or do not receive adequate treatment. Therefore primary healthcare has been identified as essential to improving the delivery of mental healthcare. Consultation liaison is a model of mental healthcare where the primary care provider maintains the central role in the delivery of mental healthcare, with a mental health specialist providing consultative support. Consultation liaison has the potential to enhance the delivery of mental healthcare in the primary care setting and, in turn, improve outcomes for people with a mental disorder.

‘Collaborative care’ (involving a case manager) and ‘primary care liaison’ or ‘consultation liaison’ (with no case manager) are models of liaison psychiatry in primary care. Here, I briefly consider the evidence for collaborative care, discuss Gillies et al 's Cochrane review on consultation liaison, and suggest avenues for future study and development of liaison psychiatry in primary care.

The traditional approach to selecting antipsychotic medication involves little more than trial and error. Recent advances in genetics and molecular science offer the hope of a ‘personalised medicine’ approach to antipsychotic development and prescribing in schizophrenia. Personalised medicine is the practice of tailoring medical treatment to the individual characteristics of each patient. In schizophrenia, this will involve the identification of more homogeneous subsets of patients through the application of genetics, epigenetics, proteomics and metabolomics, neuroimaging and other biomarkers, and the use of these findings to stratify patients according to their response to treatment. In this article, we focus on the emerging evidence in pharmacogenetics and biomarkers for assessing individual response and tolerability of antipsychotic medication in schizophrenia.

Patients with severe and enduring somatoform disorders (SESD) characteristically present with multiple, recurrent and frequently changing physical symptoms that have usually been present for several years before referral to a psychiatrist/psychologist. Many patients report long histories of contact with both primary and tertiary care services, have undergone repeated fruitless investigations and have high levels of disability. SESD are responsible for disproportionately high healthcare costs and are the third most common cause of workplace absence. Identification of patients with SESD by psychiatrists requires particular skills: collaboration with colleagues is vital and there are risks of iatrogenic harm. We describe the obstacles encountered in identifying these patients as well as methods of assessment and management. Treatment pathways best suited to managing this large and as yet untended group of patients are described.

Mindfulness is increasingly being recommended to help patients with recurrent depression and anxiety stay well. However, current treatment recommendations ask a lot in terms of commitment, with around 100 hours of practice and learning over a 2-month period. There is therefore increased interest in approaches that deliver key mindfulness skills in a shorter time frame.

This article updates previous evidence on the role of primary care in the management of depression and related disorders, unexplained physical symptoms, and severe and enduring mental illness. Regarding depression and related disorders, there is now evidence for the benefits of non-medical interventions and collaborative care, providing alternatives to the simplistic over prescription of antidepressant medication. For severe and enduring illness, the emphasis in primary care is now on the effective management of comorbid physical health problems. The article also summarises best practice for the primary care assessment and management of dementia, including the need for holistic review of care quality and the potential benefits of collaborative care. Finally, it notes the growing emphasis on primary mental healthcare in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC).

We review how research over the past decade both supports existing knowledge about the risk factors that children in the UK affected by parental substance misuse face, and adds to our knowledge about the protective factors, protective processes and evidence of resilience which can reduce the likelihood that children will experience poor outcomes. Further research is needed to understand what areas of resilience are most important to target and how other variables, such as gender or age, may influence how protective factors affect the development of resilience. Longitudinal research is also needed to better understand how an individual's resilience may change over time. Finally, there remain many considerable challenges which practitioners, service providers, commissioners and policy makers face in better meeting the needs of this population of children.

The clinical and public mental health aspects of alcohol misuse in older people (both men and women) have increasing relevance for both old age and addiction psychiatrists. Clinical presentations are often complex and involve a number of different psychiatric, physical and psychosocial factors. The assessment, treatment and aftercare of alcohol-related and comorbid other mental disorders will also involve a broad range of interventions from a wide range of practitioners. Given its growing clinical relevance, there are particular areas, such as alcohol-related brain damage and drug interactions with alcohol, that deserve special attention.

With the subspecialisation of psychiatry in the UK, clinicians may encounter problems at the interface between specialties. This article focuses on the interface between general adult psychiatry and behavioural neurology/neuropsychiatry. Important interface issues include the identification of psychiatric symptoms in patients with organic brain pathology and the remit and organisation of general and specialist services. Options for optimum cooperation are presented alongside practical examples of clinical issues of neuropsychiatric relevance.

Keeping up to date with the best evidence on treatment interventions is an essential part of clinical practice, but it can seem an overwhelming task for busy clinicians. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses provide a useful and convenient summary of knowledge and form an essential part of an evidence-based approach to clinical practice. However, these reviews vary in methodology and therefore in the quality of the recommendations they provide. Clinicians need to feel confident in their skills of critical appraisal, so that they can assess the relative merits of systematic reviews. In this article we discuss the strengths and limitations of different types of evidence synthesis to enable the reader to feel more confident in assessing the scientific information to use in clinical practice.

The article by Smith et al (2016) provides a valuable summary on the usefulness and interpretation of systematic reviews. This commentary adds a discussion of confirmation bias and a summary of some of the most useful influential systematic reviews and meta-analyses in mental health.