Personal experiences of mental health problems among clinical psychologists may be fairly common. Stigma, concerns about negative consequences of disclosure and shame as barriers to disclosure and help-seeking merit further consideration.

Results support an approach to communicating about mental health disclosure that incorporates responsibility, interdependency, and transparency. Suggestions for further research are discussed.

People with mental health problems sometimes have the choice whether or not to disclose these to others. The decision to disclose or conceal is likely to depend on various factors. In this systematic review, we examined the findings of studies looking at factors affecting adults' decisions to disclose or conceal a mental health problem outside of the workplace. Key databases (PsycINFO, Scopus and Web of Science) revealed 19 relevant articles published between January 2005 and August 2015. Common factors affecting disclosure or concealment included anticipated stigma, characteristics of the target, relationship with the target, mental health of the discloser, rules and beliefs about mental health problems, and fears about control and identity. Demographic factors were not strongly associated with disclosure decisions. We also found that measures used to understand mental health disclosure may fail to capture the complexity of the process. Implications for future research and policy are discussed, including the need for palpable public support for people with mental health problems, the need for healthcare professionals to establish better relationships with service users, and the value of respecting non-disclosure.

This paper derives from the first author's Doctorate in Clinical Psychology at University College London. It has been presented at several conferences in various forms.

Background: Within the current context of a global pandemic, the value of the Internet has been greatly elevated for many people. This study is an investigation into a 30-day online intervention called Creativity in Mind (CIM).Aims: To provide a preliminary indication of the relationship between participation in CIM and change in mood symptoms and wellbeing.Methods: A co-produced mixed methods design was used to evaluate CIM. Data was obtained from 55 participants. Each day for 30 days participants received a predetermined creative challenge that they were encouraged to complete and share within the group. Measures of mood and wellbeing were collected at three time points, including a three-month follow-up. Qualitative interviews were undertaken with 18 participants and analysed using framework analysis.Results: Scores on mood and wellbeing measures showed an overall significant improvement following completion of the programme. However, only a small number of participants demonstrated clinically significant improvement (14%) or deterioration (5%). The qualitative data indicated that CIM was experienced positively, with some negative emotions arising from the volume of interactions and negative comparisons between participants.Conclusions: Preliminary results demonstrate that the pattern of clinically significant change across individual participants was comparable to other psychological therapy.