Objective: Recovery, defined as a personal process of living with mental illness, has become a prominent concept in mental health care. We aimed to map the state of the art of conceptualizing recovery, its promoting and impeding factors, recovery-oriented practice, and the assessment of recovery. Method: A scoping review of systematic reviews and meta-analyses was performed. Systematic searches were conducted, supplemented with hand-searching in reference lists. Results: Of 228 articles that were identified and 33 that were reviewed, a total of 25 were included. This review showed that the CHIME conceptual framework for personal recovery is widely endorsed, containing the elements of connectedness, hope and optimism, identity, meaning in life, and empowerment. Although personal recovery first and foremost starts from individual preferences, the CHIME framework should be adapted according to culture and unique population characteristics. "Difficulties and trauma" should be added, and the person's choice, risk taking, and coping with challenges should be emphasized. Barriers to recovery are stigma and negative effects of mental health services and medication. Facilitators of recovery include spirituality, personal agency, and social support. Recovery-focused interventions, in which peer providers are involved, enhance recovery, hope, and empowerment. For assessing recovery outcomes, multiple instruments are accepted as methodologically sound. Conclusions: Personal recovery is conceptualized as complementary to clinical recovery and represents processes rather than outcomes. Additional work is needed to bridge the gap between the concept of recovery-oriented practice and routinely provided interventions. A broad framework of recovery is needed, and more research is needed into the working mechanisms of personal recovery processes. Impact and ImplicationsPersonal recovery entails the idea of learning to live a good life in the face of mental illness. It refers to a process rather than to an outcome, including elements of connectedness, hope and optimism, identity, meaning in life, empowerment, responsible risk taking, and coping with challenges. Recovery-oriented practices should encompass direct work not only with clients but also with families, systems, and communities.

Objective. Research on the psychological toll of the COVID-19 pandemic is being conducted in various countries. This study aimed to examine risk factors for mental health problems among Israeli adults during this crisis. Methods. A total of 204 participants took part in the study. They completed self-report questionnaires assessing perceived stress, anxiety, quality of life, and various questions related to quarantine, pre-existing health issues, and worries related to the virus. The study took place during the last two weeks of March 2020. Results. The majority of participants reported relatively high levels of perceived stress and corona-related worries, but low levels of anxiety. Female gender, younger age, corona-related loneliness, and pre-existing chronic illness were all related to higher levels of psychological distress and lower levels of quality of life. Conclusions. While considering the preliminary nature of these results, the current study highlights risk factors for psychological distress in light of the corona pandemic. Attention should be given to sociodemographic variables that were identified as related to psychological distress, as well as to the important role of loneliness, when screening and treating people during this crisis. More research is needed in order to fully understand the scope and correlates of psychological difficulties during these challenging times. Statement of contribution What is already known on this subject? Studies on the psychological implications of COVID-19 are being conducted in many countries, showing a wide variety of mental health problems, including depression, anxiety, and impaired functioning. In addition, some studies have begun identifying risk factors for psychological distress, including sociodemographic and health-related factors. What does this study add? The present study adds to existing COVID-19 literature, by presenting findings on the pandemic's mental health implications, and their risk factors, in Israel.

Objective: The current study examines the effect of perceived support from different agents (spouse, family, friends, religion-spirituality) on psychological distress experienced by women with advanced breast cancer and their male spouses.Methods: In all, 150 couples consisting of women with advanced breast cancer and their spouses completed the Cancer Perceived Agent of Support Questionnaire and the Brief Symptom Inventory Scale.Results: Spouses reported more psychological distress (global, depression and anxiety) than patients. Both patients and spouses report a similar level of spousal support, and spouses reported a lower level of support provided from family and friends. Perceived support in the current study contributed significantly to the explanations of global psychological distress, depression and anxiety both for patients and their spouses. However, the specific agents of support that were significant in explaining these outcomes varied between patients and their spouses. For patients, family support received by both patient and partner was the most important source of support, protecting from psychological distress, while for the male partners, support from friends was most important. Religious-based support was found to contribute negatively to the psychological distress of the patient and spouse.Conclusions: This study emphasizes the role of breast cancer spouses as care receivers in parallel to their role as caregivers, which is especially important in light of the high psychological distress reported by the spouses. The findings support the buffering effect, which different agents of support have against psychological distress while facing cancer for both patients and spouses. Patients and spouses differ with regard to the agents of support possessing this buffering effect.

Bleuler suggested that fragmentation of thought, emotion and volition were the unifying feature of the disorders he termed schizophrenia. In this paper we review research seeking to measure some of the aspects of fragmentation related to the experience of the self and others described by Bleuler. We focus on work which uses the concept of metacognition to characterize and quantify alterations or decrements in the processes by which fragments or pieces of information are integrated into a coherent sense of self and others. We describe the rationale and support for one method for quantifying metacognition and its potential to study the fragmentation of a person's sense of themselves, others and the relative place of themselves and others in the larger human community. We summarize research using that method which suggests that deficits in metacognition commonly occur in schizophrenia and are related to basic neurobiological indices of brain functioning. We also present findings indicating that the capacity for metacognition in schizophrenia is positively related to a broad range of aspects of psychological and social functioning when measured concurrently and prospectively. Finally, we discuss the evolution and study of one therapy that targets metacognitive capacity, Metacognitive Reflection and Insight Therapy (MERIT) and its potential to treat fragmentation and promote recovery.

The coronavirus COVID-19 and the global pandemic has already had a substantial disruptive impact on society, posing major challenges to the provision of mental health services in a time of crisis, and carrying the spectre of an increased burden to mental health, both in terms of existing psychiatric disorder, and emerging psychological distress from the pandemic. In this paper we provide a framework for understanding the key challenges for psychologically informed mental health care during and beyond the pandemic. We identify three groups that can benefit from psychological approaches to mental health, and/or interventions relating to COVID-19. These are (i) healthcare workers engaged in frontline response to the pandemic and their patients; (ii) individuals who will experience the emergence of new mental health distress as a function of being diagnosed with COVID-19, or losing family and loved ones to the illness, or the psychological effects of prolonged social distancing; and (iii) individuals with existing mental health conditions who are either diagnosed with COVID-19 or whose experience of social distancing exacerbates existing vulnerabilities. Drawing on existing literature and our own experience of adapting treatments to the crisis we suggest a number of salient points to consider in identifying risks and offering support to all three groups. We also offer a number of practical and technical considerations for working psychotherapeutically with existing patients where COVID-19 restrictions have forced a move to online or technologically mediated delivery of psychological interventions.