Background: Given the complex nature of opioid addiction treatment and the rising number of available opioid substitution and antagonist therapies (OSAT), there is no 'gold standard' measure of treatment effectiveness, and each successive trial measures a different set of outcomes which reflect success in arbitrary or opportune terms. We sought to describe the variation in current outcomes employed across clinical trials for opioid addiction, as well as determine whether a discrepancy exists between the treatment targets that patients consider important and how treatment effectiveness is measured in the literature. Methods: We searched nine commonly used databases (e.g., EMBASE, MEDLINE) from inception to August 1, 2015. Outcomes used across trials were extracted and categorized according to previously established domains. To evaluate patient-reported goals of treatment, semi-structured interviews were conducted with 18 adults undergoing methadone treatment. Results: We identified 60 trials eligible for inclusion. Once outcomes were categorized into eight broad domains (e.g., abstinence/substance abuse), we identified 21 specific outcomes with furthermore 53 subdomains and 118 measurements. Continued opioid use and treatment retention were the most commonly reported measures (46%, n = 28). The majority of patients agreed that abstinence from opioids was a primary goal in their treatment, although they also stressed goals under-reported in clinical trials. Conclusions: There is inconsistency in the measures used to evaluate the effectiveness of OSATs. Individual and population level decision making is being guided by a standard of effect considered useful to researchers yet in direct conflict with what patients deem important.

Males are more non-adherent to public health measures for containing COVID-19 while females experience more COVID-19-related distress. Personality traits may influence both non-adherence and distress. We examined sensation seeking (SS), anxiety sensitivity (AS), impulsivity, and hopelessness as traits potentially associated with non-adherence and distress in response to COVID-19. Furthermore, we sought to understand if known sex differences in SS (male>female) and AS (female>male) may explain sex differences on these two COVID-19 outcomes. In the first month of the pandemic, 400 adults (mean age = 32.16 years; 45.3%F) completed the Substance Use Risk Profile Scale to assess personality. Degree of adherence to public health recommendations and COVID-19-related distress were also measured. Male sex was indirectly related to poorer adherence to stay-at-home advisories via SS, and female sex was indirectly related to higher COVID-19 distress via AS. Personality-targeted interventions may help reduce non-adherence and COVID-19 distress, potentially reducing sex differences.

Background: Suicide is a serious public health concern for which there have been well-established protective and risk factors reported in literature. There is a lack of evidence on the indirect effects of other variables on these factors. Specifically, the association between stressful life events and suicidal behavior may be affected by perceived social support, but its role in this association is largely uninvestigated.Objectives: Thus, this paper aims to explore the role of perceived social support in the association between stressful life events and suicidal behavior. Perceived social support will be explored as a mediator and as a moderator in this association.Methods: Data were obtained from the Determinants of Suicidal Behavior Conventional and Emergent Risk (DISCOVER), a study conducted to identify risk factors of suicidal behavior. The study participants are individuals with suicide attempts admitted to hospital. Participants (n = 343) were recruited from hospital setting. Suicidal behavior was measured using two outcomes (1) the occurrence of a suicide attempt (2) level of suicide intent as measured by the Pierce Suicide Intent Scale. Perceived social support was measured using the Sarason Social Support Questionnaire.Results: Stressful life events were significantly associated with suicide attempts (OR 1.440, 95% CI 1.440, 1.682, p < 0.001) and perceived social support (B −0.785, 95% CI −1.501, −0.068, p = 0.032). There was no significant mediation effect by perceived social support in the association between stressful life events and suicide attempts (Sobel's test statistic 1.64, p = 0.100). Perceived social support did not moderate the relationship between stressful life events and suicide attempts [(OR 1.007, 95% CI 0.987, 1.027, p = 0.514] or the relationship between stressful life events and level of suicidal intent (B −0.043, 95% CI −0.132, 0.046, p = 0.343).Conclusion: Stressful life events are associated with increased risk of suicide attempts. The study also identified an inverse relationship between stressful life events and perceived social support. These associations were independent of perceived social support. This study highlights the effects of stressful life events on suicide risk is not affected by perceived social support, requiring further investigation into measures to reduce the impact of social stressors on people with risk of suicide.

Background Given the complex nature of opioid addiction treatment and the rising number of available opioid substitution and antagonist therapies (OSAT), there is no ‘gold standard’ measure of treatment effectiveness, and each successive trial measures a different set of outcomes which reflect success in arbitrary or opportune terms.We sought to describe the variation in current outcomes employed across clinical trials for opioid addiction, as well as determine whether a discrepancy exists between the treatment targets that patients consider important and how treatment effectiveness is measured in the literature. Methods We searched nine commonly used databases (e.g. EMBASE, MEDLINE) from inception to August 1, 2015. Outcomes used across trials were extracted and categorized according to previously established domains. To evaluate patient reported goals of treatment, semi-structured interviews were conducted with 18 adults undergoing methadone treatment. Results We identified 60 trials eligible for inclusion. Once outcomes were categorized into eight broad domains (e.g. abstinence/substance abuse), we identified 21 specific outcomes with furthermore 53 subdomains and 118 measurements. Continued opioid use and treatment retention were the most commonly reported measures (46%, n=28). The majority of patients agreed that abstinence from opioids was a primary goal in their treatment, however they also stressed goals under-reported in clinical trials. Conclusion There is inconsistency in the measures used to evaluate the effectiveness of OSATs. Individual and population level decision making is being guided by a standard of effect considered useful to researchers yet in direct conflict with what patients deem important. PROSPERO ID CRD42013006507

Background: Using a multigroup path analysis, we examined if hazardous alcohol use mediated the relations between elevated externalizing personality traits (i.e., impulsivity or sensation seeking) and reduced adherence to COVID-19 public health guidelines. We hypothesized that those high in externalizing personality traits would demonstrate less adherence to public health guidelines and that hazardous alcohol use would mediate this relationship. Methods: First- and second-year undergraduates ( N = 1232; ages 18–25) from five Canadian universities participated in a cross-sectional survey between January to April 2021. Results: Individuals with higher levels of impulsive or sensation seeking personality traits demonstrated poorer adherence to COVID-19 public health guidelines and these relations were mediated by hazardous alcohol use. Conclusions: Results suggest that hazardous drinking is an important target for students high in impulsivity and sensation seeking to increase their adherence to public health guidelines and thereby help control viral spread.