In 2021, approximately 15,000 men in Germany died from prostate cancer (PCa). The national health policy is considering shifting from annual digital rectal examination (DRE)-based screening to an age-related prostate-specific antigen (PSA)-based risk-adapted and organized screening strategy. Our research investigated the cost–utility of the current DRE-based strategy versus organized age-related PSA-based risk-adaptive PCa screening strategies in Germany.

We adapted the Swedish Prostata model to the German context, recalibrating it with PCa clinical and epidemiological data from the national and state registries. The model includes preclinical and clinical disease health states defined by tumor, nodal, and metastatic stages and Gleason scores, and assumes that the benefits of screening arise from stage shift. We assessed the cost–utility of 14 strategies, ranging from no screening to DRE, and age-related, PSA-based, risk-adapted screening. Health state utility values and test characteristics were sourced from the literature. Inpatient and outpatient care costs were derived from the German diagnostic-related groups and uniform-based valuation systems.

Among all strategies evaluated and compared with no screening, the “DRE only” strategy led to substantial overdiagnosis, the highest incremental cost, and minimal quality-adjusted life years (QALY) gains. PSA testing starting at 50 to 60 years with reflex MRI for PSA greater than 3 ng/mL cases followed by combined systemic and targeted biopsy reduced the number of biopsies and overdiagnosis by 75 percent and 26 percent, albeit for fewer QALYs and higher costs (dominated) than the same strategy without reflex MRI. The PSA-based risk-adaptive strategy, starting at 50 to 60 years without reflex MRI, demonstrated an 85 percent probability of being cost effective within the EUR30,000 (USD32,211) to EUR100,000 (USD107,369)/QALY willingness-to-pay range.

While Germany’s HTA emphasizes clinically added benefits and health-related quality of life, cost-effectiveness analysis substantiates this evidence. As a standalone early detection tool, DRE leads to substantial overdiagnosis, unnecessary biopsies, and increased healthcare costs. Overall, this study demonstrated the importance of age-related PSA risk-adaptive PCa screening. The value of MRI deserves further investigation, considering MRI’s positive effect on screening acceptability.

DSM-5 differentiates avoidant/restrictive food intake disorder (ARFID) from other eating disorders (EDs) by a lack of overvaluation of body weight/shape driving restrictive eating. However, clinical observations and research demonstrate ARFID and shape/weight motivations sometimes co-occur. To inform classification, we: (1) derived profiles underlying restriction motivation and examined their validity and (2) described diagnostic characterizations of individuals in each profile to explore whether findings support current diagnostic schemes. We expected, consistent with DSM-5, that profiles would comprise individuals endorsing solely ARFID or restraint (i.e. trying to eat less to control shape/weight) motivations.

We applied latent profile analysis to 202 treatment-seeking individuals (ages 10–79 years [M = 26, s.d. = 14], 76% female) with ARFID or a non-ARFID ED, using the Nine-Item ARFID Screen (Picky, Appetite, and Fear subscales) and the Eating Disorder Examination-Questionnaire Restraint subscale as indicators.

A 5-profile solution emerged: Restraint/ARFID-Mixed (n = 24; 8% [n = 2] with ARFID diagnosis); ARFID-2 (with Picky/Appetite; n = 56; 82% ARFID); ARFID-3 (with Picky/Appetite/Fear; n = 40; 68% ARFID); Restraint (n = 45; 11% ARFID); and Non-Endorsers (n = 37; 2% ARFID). Two profiles comprised individuals endorsing solely ARFID motivations (ARFID-2, ARFID-3) and one comprising solely restraint motivations (Restraint), consistent with DSM-5. However, Restraint/ARFID-Mixed (92% non-ARFID ED diagnoses, comprising 18% of those with non-ARFID ED diagnoses in the full sample) endorsed ARFID and restraint motivations.

The heterogeneous profiles identified suggest ARFID and restraint motivations for dietary restriction may overlap somewhat and that individuals with non-ARFID EDs can also endorse high ARFID symptoms. Future research should clarify diagnostic boundaries between ARFID and non-ARFID EDs.

Evidence suggests that suicide stigma (i.e. negative attitudes towards persons affected by suicide/suicidality) and suicide normalisation (i.e. liberal attitudes towards suicide) are both associated with increased suicide risk. Despite conceptual similarities and potential interaction, suicide stigma and suicide normalisation have usually been investigated separately. We used cross-sectional data from a community sample to test the association between suicide stigma and suicide normalisation as well as to identify their respective determinants and consequences.

Participants were N = 3.269 adults recruited from an established online-panel using quotas to reflect the composition of the German general population with regard to age, gender, education and region. We collected information about suicide stigma, suicide normalisation, intentions to seek help for suicidality, current suicidality, suicide literacy, negative mood and socio-demographic variables. We used regression modelling to determine the association between suicide stigma and suicide normalisation as well as to identify their determinants and consequences.

Suicide stigma and suicide normalisation were inversely associated so that higher suicide stigma scores were linked to lower suicide normalisation. More suicide stigma was associated with reduced intentions to seeking professional help, increased willingness to seek help from family and friends and lower odds to experience current suicidality, however the association between suicide stigma and intentions to seek professional help diminished after controlling for confounding variables. Increased suicide normalisation was linked to reduced intentions to seek help from professionals or family and friends, as well as higher odds to experience current suicidality, even after controlling for confounding variables.

Our findings suggest that interventions to reduce public suicide stigma are at risk to unintentionally increase suicide normalisation, which appears to be a key barrier to seeking help for suicidality. Future research should therefore identify strategies to improve attitudes towards persons affected by suicidality that avoid normalisation, i.e. do not convey the message of suicide as an acceptable solution for difficult life situations. One strategy with great potential to safely reduce public suicide sigma could be interventions that stimulate interpersonal contact with affected persons sharing their recovery story.