Childhood maltreatment (CM) significantly increases the risk of developing post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) for which the prevalence in Europe is higher than initially assumed. While the high economic burden of PTSD is well-documented, little is known about the health care cost differences between individuals with PTSD-CM and those without PTSD in Germany. This study aimed to determine the excess health care and absenteeism costs associated with PTSD-CM in Germany.

Baseline data from a multi-center randomized controlled trial on individuals with PTSD-CM (n = 361) were combined with data from individuals without PTSD (n = 4760). Entropy balancing was used to balance the data sets with regard to sociodemographic characteristics. Six-month excess health care costs from a societal perspective were calculated for 2022, using two-part models with logit specification for the first part and a generalized linear model for the second part.

The total six-month excess costs associated with PTSD-CM were €8864 (95% CI: €6855 to €10,873) per person. Of this, the excess health care costs accounted for €4647 (95% CI €3296 to €5997) and the excess costs of absenteeism for €4217 (95% CI: €3121 to €5314). Individuals with mild to moderate PTSD symptoms incurred total excess costs of €6038 (95% CI: €3879 to €8197), while those with severe to extreme symptoms faced €11,433 (95% CI: €8220 to €14,646).

Excess health care and absenteeism costs associated with PTSD-CM were substantial, with absenteeism accounting for roughly half of the total excess costs.

Employment and relationship are crucial for social integration. However, individuals with major psychiatric disorders often face challenges in these domains.

We investigated employment and relationship status changes among patients across the affective and psychotic spectrum – in comparison with healthy controls, examining whether diagnostic groups or functional levels influence these transitions.

The sample from the longitudinal multicentric PsyCourse Study comprised 1260 patients with affective and psychotic spectrum disorders and 441 controls (mean age ± s.d., 39.91 ± 12.65 years; 48.9% female). Multistate models (Markov) were used to analyse transitions in employment and relationship status, focusing on transition intensities. Analyses contained multiple multistate models adjusted for age, gender, job or partner, diagnostic group and Global Assessment of Functioning (GAF) in different combinations to analyse the impact of the covariates on the hazard ratio of changing employment or relationship status.

The clinical group had a higher hazard ratio of losing partner (hazard ratio 1.46, P < 0.001) and job (hazard ratio 4.18, P < 0.001) than the control group (corrected for age/gender). Compared with controls, clinical groups had a higher hazard of losing partner (affective group, hazard ratio 2.69, P = 0.003; psychotic group, hazard ratio 3.06, P = 0.001) and job (affective group, hazard ratio 3.43, P < 0.001; psychotic group, hazard ratio 4.11, P < 0.001). Adjusting for GAF, the hazard ratio of losing partner and job decreased in both clinical groups compared with controls.

Patients face an increased hazard of job loss and relationship dissolution compared with healthy controls, and this is partially conditioned by the diagnosis and functional level. These findings underscore a high demand for destigmatisation and support for individuals in managing their functional limitations.

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.

The COVID-19 pandemic has been a catalyst for a shift towards virtual forms of working, and specific support for the provision of virtual therapy (BPS, 2020). Remotely delivered therapy has known potential benefits, such as improving access to people living in underserved areas and for those who struggle to attend face-to-face appointments due to psychosocial, physical or geographical constraints. Those with neurological conditions frequently fall in these groups.

Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT) is an evidence-based psychological intervention which aims to improve the physical and mental health of people living with neurological conditions. However, there are several considerations to translating this into a virtual therapy for this clinical group that have not yet been thoroughly empirically evaluated. Such considerations include: fatigue, cognitive difficulties in the context of virtual communication, adaptations within the therapeutic alliance, and translation of dynamic and interactive therapeutic exercises within a virtual medium.

This study aimed to describe the experiences of Clinical Psychologists delivering ACT remotely in the context of two randomised controlled feasibility and acceptability clinical trials for young people (aged 11 to 24) who have experienced a brain tumour or Tuberous Sclerosis Complex. Exploring therapist perceptions and experiences provides valuable insights into potential barriers and facilitators to engagement with remote ACT delivery.

Clinical Psychologists who were trained to deliver ACT via videoconferencing were invited to take part in virtual interviews. The semi-structured interview guide aimed to draw on their experience of ACT training, supervision, remote delivery, and perceived impact of ACT. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed using inductive thematic analysis.

Five Clinical Psychologists were interviewed. Interview data were coded into broad themes around the experience of delivering ACT, engaging with remote systems, the wider perceived impact of ACT and the adaptability of ACT. ACT training was reported to be an effective, positive experience and the opportunity for regular peer and group supervision worked to solidify the training and support fidelity to the ACT processes. It was largely acknowledged that while remote delivery of the intervention did create some initial challenges to the therapeutic process, this approach created opportunity for the young people to access psychological support that they might not have been able to engage with due to logistical considerations. Clinical Psychologists also shared that training in and experience of delivering ACT had a positive and meaningful impact on their clinical practice and personal conduct. They also reported that ACT was adaptable to the needs of the young people in the clinical trials and felt appropriate to deliver in this context.

This in-depth, qualitative study demonstrated the clinical promise of remotely delivered ACT. Clinical Psychologists viewed remotely delivered ACT as an appropriate, acceptable and feasible intervention for young people with experience of brain tumour and Tuberous Sclerosis Complex within the context of research, that would be generalisable to everyday clinical practice.

We identify a set of essential recent advances in climate change research with high policy relevance, across natural and social sciences: (1) looming inevitability and implications of overshooting the 1.5°C warming limit, (2) urgent need for a rapid and managed fossil fuel phase-out, (3) challenges for scaling carbon dioxide removal, (4) uncertainties regarding the future contribution of natural carbon sinks, (5) intertwinedness of the crises of biodiversity loss and climate change, (6) compound events, (7) mountain glacier loss, (8) human immobility in the face of climate risks, (9) adaptation justice, and (10) just transitions in food systems.

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Assessment Reports provides the scientific foundation for international climate negotiations and constitutes an unmatched resource for researchers. However, the assessment cycles take multiple years. As a contribution to cross- and interdisciplinary understanding of climate change across diverse research communities, we have streamlined an annual process to identify and synthesize significant research advances. We collected input from experts on various fields using an online questionnaire and prioritized a set of 10 key research insights with high policy relevance. This year, we focus on: (1) the looming overshoot of the 1.5°C warming limit, (2) the urgency of fossil fuel phase-out, (3) challenges to scale-up carbon dioxide removal, (4) uncertainties regarding future natural carbon sinks, (5) the need for joint governance of biodiversity loss and climate change, (6) advances in understanding compound events, (7) accelerated mountain glacier loss, (8) human immobility amidst climate risks, (9) adaptation justice, and (10) just transitions in food systems. We present a succinct account of these insights, reflect on their policy implications, and offer an integrated set of policy-relevant messages. This science synthesis and science communication effort is also the basis for a policy report contributing to elevate climate science every year in time for the United Nations Climate Change Conference.

We highlight recent and policy-relevant advances in climate change research – with input from more than 200 experts.

In the connected world, although societies are not directly involved in a military conflict, they are exposed to media reports of violence.

We assessed the effects of such exposures on mental health in Germany during the military conflict in Ukraine.

We used the German population-based cohort for digital health research, DigiHero, launching a survey on the eighth day of the Russo-Ukrainian war. Of the 27 509 cohort participants from the general population, 19 444 (70.7%) responded within 17 days. We measured mental health and fear of the impact of war compared with other fears (natural disasters or health-related).

In a subsample of 4441 participants assessed twice, anxiety in the population (measured by the Generalised Anxiety Disorder-7 screener) was higher in the first weeks of war than during the strongest COVID-19 restrictions. Anxiety was elevated across the whole age spectrum, and the mean was above the cut-off for mild anxiety. Over 95% of participants expressed various degrees of fear of the impact of war, whereas the percentage for other investigated fears was 0.47–0.82. A one-point difference in the fear of the impact of war was associated with a 2.5 point (95% CI 2.42–2.58) increase in anxiety (11.9% of the maximum anxiety score). For emotional distress, the increase was 0.67 points (0.66–0.68) (16.75% of the maximum score).

The population in Germany reacted to the Russo-Ukrainian war with substantial distress, exceeding reactions during the strongest restrictions in the COVID-19 pandemic. Fear of the impact of war was associated with worse mental health.