At the heart of this investigation lies the novel application of counterfactual modeling techniques, enabling researchers to estimate what the global burden of mental disorders would have been absent the pandemic, while accounting for pre-existing trends and other confounding factors. By integrating epidemiological data spanning three decades, this approach reveals the stark contrast between expected and observed mental health conditions during one of modern history’s most disruptive periods. The study’s multi-faceted methodology blends statistical innovation with public health insights, exemplifying a critical advancement in understanding pandemic-era mental health dynamics.

The study’s timeline extends back over three decades, essential for constructing a reliable baseline trend in the incidence and prevalence of mental disorders such as depression, anxiety, and substance use disorders. By comparing this long-term baseline to data collected during the pandemic years, researchers could quantify the excess mental health burden generated specifically by COVID-19’s socio-economic upheaval, lockdown measures, and healthcare disruptions. Their analysis exposes not only a quantitative surge in mental health disorders worldwide but also provides geographic and demographic specificity to these changes, highlighting vulnerable populations disproportionately impacted.

One of the most striking revelations of the research is the unprecedented rise in disorders such as major depressive disorder and anxiety globally in just the first two years of the pandemic. The findings suggest that the mental health consequences of COVID-19 are multifactorial, rooted in fears surrounding the virus itself, social isolation, financial instability, and significant changes in daily routines. The modeling identifies regions where the mental health increase far exceeds historical trends, drawing urgent attention to the need for targeted mental health interventions at both global and local levels.

A deep dive into the data reveals that traditional healthcare systems were often overwhelmed, leading to limited access to mental health services at a time when the need soared. The authors discuss how mental health infrastructures—already insufficient prior to the pandemic—struggled to adapt to lockdown-imposed restrictions and the surge in psychological distress. These systemic vulnerabilities exacerbated the mental health crisis, underlining the critical importance of integrated, resilient healthcare delivery models capable of maintaining services during global emergencies.

The study underscores methodological innovations that integrate demographic variables such as age, gender, and socioeconomic status, offering clues about differential risk patterns across populations. Younger adults and women appear to have borne a disproportionate share of pandemic-related mental health burdens, reflecting broader disparities influenced by economic precarity, caregiving responsibilities, and heightened exposure to social stressors during lockdowns. These demographic insights not only contribute to the epidemiological literature but also inform more equitable public health policy developments.

Geographically, the study’s modeling identifies regions in low- and middle-income countries facing acute mental health impacts, linked to constrained healthcare infrastructure combined with severe socio-economic shocks. The pandemic’s ripple effects magnified pre-existing gaps in mental health resources, contributing to an alarming amplification of untreated or poorly managed disorders. This revelation calls for a paradigm shift in global mental health planning, emphasizing capacity building and equitable resource distribution to mitigate the widening mental health divide.

The investigation also considers indirect ramifications of the pandemic on mental health, such as increased substance use and suicidal behaviors, which compound the overall disease burden. These downstream effects, intertwined with the direct psychological impact, highlight a complex web of consequences necessitating multidisciplinary approaches. The combined epidemiological and social perspectives presented in the study challenge traditional siloed models of health research and advocate for holistic frameworks that integrate mental health with broader public health strategies.

Importantly, the modeling predicts future trajectories of mental disorder burdens, projecting continued elevated prevalence even as the acute phase of the pandemic recedes. This persistence of mental health challenges post-pandemic poses severe implications for healthcare systems globally, which must prepare for sustained demand for mental health services. Policymakers are urged to prioritize mental health recovery plans that accommodate long-term interventions, fostering resilience and psychological well-being through innovative service delivery and community-based supports.

The researchers commendably discuss the limitations inherent in counterfactual modeling, including data quality constraints and assumptions necessary for projecting baseline trends. These candid acknowledgments underscore the need for improved real-time mental health surveillance, especially during crises, to enable sharper policy responses rooted in robust evidence. Future research directions highlighted in the study advocate for ongoing longitudinal investigations to fully capture the pandemic’s lasting mental health imprint.

Complementing the quantitative analyses, the study integrates qualitative insights from global mental health experts, contextualizing the numerical trends within real-world healthcare and societal frameworks. This mixed-methods approach enriches the interpretation of results by linking statistical patterns with lived experiences, providing a comprehensive view of the pandemic’s far-reaching effects on mental well-being. It also reinforces the imperative for multidisciplinary collaboration in both research and practice to address complex public health challenges.

In response to these findings, global health organizations are prompted to reassess and amplify mental health priorities within the broader pandemic recovery agenda. Investment in mental health infrastructure, digital mental health innovations, and workforce training emerges as critical to closing treatment gaps exacerbated by the crisis. This study serves as a clarion call for coordinated international efforts to elevate mental health as a fundamental component of global health security and resilience.

Moreover, the study’s transformative use of counterfactual modeling sets a new benchmark for epidemiological research into pandemic impacts, offering a replicable framework for future investigations into multifactorial health crises. By disentangling the unique effects of unprecedented events from prevailing trends, such methodologies enhance the precision of public health surveillance and inform evidence-based resource allocation. This methodological leap forward promises to deepen our understanding of how global disruptions shape health trajectories across populations.

The societal implications resonating from this research extend beyond clinical domains, highlighting mental health as a critical determinant of social and economic stability. As mental disorders surge, their intersection with productivity, education, and social cohesion becomes increasingly apparent, risking long-term societal fragmentation. Incorporating mental health strategies into broader recovery and resilience-building efforts will be essential for safeguarding not only individual well-being but also community and national vitality in the post-pandemic era.

In sum, this expansive analysis elucidates how the COVID-19 pandemic has precipitated a profound and multifaceted rise in the global burden of mental disorders, exposing critical vulnerabilities in health systems and societies worldwide. The study’s nuanced insights into temporal trends, demographic disparities, and geographic hotspots provide invaluable guidance for crafting effective and equitable mental health responses. Its pioneering application of counterfactual modeling marks a seminal contribution to public health science, illuminating pathways toward a more resilient global mental health landscape in a world reshaped by the pandemic.

Subject of Research: The global impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on mental disorders, analyzed through counterfactual modeling of epidemiological data from 1990 to 2021.

Article Title: The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the global burden of mental disorders: a counterfactual modeling study from 1990 to 2021.

Article References:
Chen, M., Miao, J., Chen, C. et al. The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the global burden of mental disorders: a counterfactual modeling study from 1990 to 2021. Transl Psychiatry 15, 493 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41398-025-03697-6

Image Credits: AI Generated

DOI: 21 November 2025

Psychiatry, traditionally compartmentalized and often detached from underlying biological mechanisms, has undergone a profound evolution over the past two decades. This paradigm shift aims to integrate neuroscience and psychiatry within a unified framework. The goal is to elucidate the molecular and cellular substrates underlying mental disorders to improve both diagnostics and therapeutic interventions. The Synapsy Centre, established in 2010 as a national research hub and transitioning to a permanent faculty entity in 2022, embodies this translational mission, emphasizing the urgent need to address the global mental health crisis. According to the World Health Organization, nearly one billion people suffered from mental disorders in 2019, predominantly anxiety and depression, conditions which exert profound societal and economic burdens.

Eric Nestler’s work represents the vanguard of this translational approach. His career has been dedicated to dissecting the neurobiological underpinnings of psychiatric conditions by examining how chronic stress and exposure to addictive substances induce lasting alterations in gene expression within critical brain circuits. Nestler’s pathbreaking research has revealed that these persistent molecular changes affect neural networks governing reward, motivation, and mood regulation, providing a mechanistic foundation for understanding the persistence and recurrence of mental illnesses like depression and substance use disorder.

Christian Lüscher, the director of Synapsy and chair of the prize committee, highlights Nestler as a pioneer who convincingly demonstrated the imperative of forging strong connections between basic neuroscience research and clinical psychiatry. This bridge-building is central to the modern vision of psychiatric neuroscience that Synapsy promotes—an outlook that champions open, collaborative science aimed at alleviating the profound psychological suffering experienced by millions worldwide.

A prolific author with over 700 scientific publications, Eric Nestler has significantly shaped scientific understanding of resilience, a concept that moves beyond the simplistic dichotomy of vulnerability versus protection. Instead, Nestler’s research posits resilience as an active, dynamic molecular program that can be strategically targeted to enhance an individual’s capacity to adapt to adversity and recover from psychologically traumatic events. This molecular resilience framework opens new avenues for developing therapeutics aimed at reinforcing the brain’s endogenous coping mechanisms.

Eric Nestler’s unique qualifications as both a psychiatrist and a neuroscientist position him ideally to integrate clinical observations and experimental neuroscience. His research methodology typically involves an iterative process beginning with clinical phenotyping of patients, followed by the generation of animal models that recapitulate key features of human mental disorders. These models are then validated with analyses of post-mortem human brain tissue, allowing for a feedback loop that refines experimental hypotheses and informs potential clinical translation. Several molecular pathways identified through this approach have now progressed to clinical trial phases, underscoring the translational potency of Nestler’s research.

Looking to the future, Nestler underscores the necessity for next-generation research paradigms that encompass multiscale biological inquiry, spanning molecular pathways, cellular networks, neural circuits, and behavioral phenotypes. Establishing causal links across these levels of organization is critical to developing a cohesive understanding of mental disorders and to tailoring precise, mechanism-driven interventions.

Equally important, Nestler advocates for a new breed of hybrid scientists, extensively cross-trained in both clinical psychiatry and fundamental neuroscience. By fostering a scientific ecosystem where researchers can fluidly navigate between bench and bedside, the translational pipeline can be greatly accelerated, ultimately benefiting patient outcomes.

Christian Lüscher echoes this vision, emphasizing that the longstanding divide between research and clinical psychiatry has impeded progress in mental health. Synapsy aims to cultivate a collaborative environment founded on mutual trust and interdisciplinary exchange. This environment will help generate innovative, biology-driven psychiatric approaches that maintain an unyielding focus on improving patient care.

The Synapsy Prize honors Eric Nestler not only as a scientist of extraordinary influence but also as a trailblazer inspiring an entire generation of researchers. His work serves as a beacon charting the path toward mental health treatments that are both scientifically robust and clinically impactful, grounded in human biology yet oriented towards alleviating suffering.

In conclusion, the recognition of Eric Nestler by the Synapsy Centre accentuates the urgent need to dismantle disciplinary silos in mental health research. It calls for a unified, translational neuroscience that addresses the complexity of brain disorders with precision and innovation. This award marks a seminal moment for psychiatric research, heralding a future where scientific discoveries seamlessly convert into effective therapies, ultimately transforming care for millions affected by mental illness worldwide.

Subject of Research: Neurobiological mechanisms of depression and addiction; translational psychiatry and neuroscience.

Article Title: Eric Nestler Receives the Inaugural UNIGE Synapsy Prize 2025 for Bridging Neuroscience and Clinical Psychiatry

News Publication Date: 2025

Web References:
https://mediasvc.eurekalert.org/Api/v1/Multimedia/be00d811-59a0-461a-846d-e83a08019832/Rendition/low-res/Content/Public

Image Credits: Credit: DR

Keywords: Eric Nestler, Synapsy Prize, neurobiology, depression, addiction, translational psychiatry, neuroscience, mental health, resilience, molecular psychiatry, brain circuits, clinical research

The global tally in 2021 alone revealed an alarming 444 million new cases of mental disorders, coupled with over 155 million DALYs, indicators of the vast human suffering and functional impairments attributable to these conditions. Notably, the study identified a pronounced upward trend in both the age-standardized incidence rate (ASIR) and age-standardized DALY rate (ASR), with increases of approximately 15.2% and 17.3%, respectively, over the three decades reviewed. Such trends not only reflect heightened recognition and diagnosis of mental disorders but also the growing public health impact these diseases exert worldwide.

Regional disparities emerged strongly from the analysis, with Central Sub-Saharan Africa exhibiting the highest ASIR — nearly triple that observed in East Asia, the region with the lowest rates. Contrarily, Australia reported the highest ASR, highlighting significant geographic variability in disease burden and healthcare outcomes. On a national scale, countries such as Greenland, Greece, the United States, and Australia registered the highest DALY rates, indicating concentrated areas where mental health infrastructure and intervention may require urgent reinforcement.

The socio-demographic index (SDI), a composite measure incorporating income, education, and fertility rates, profoundly influenced mental disorder burdens. Interestingly, while all SDI quintiles except East Asia experienced increased incidence rates during the COVID-19 pandemic period (2019–2021), the data underscore the pandemic’s differential impact on mental health globally. These findings provide crucial insight into how social determinants and regional dynamics intersect with disease patterns, emphasizing the need for tailored public health strategies.

Gender-based analysis revealed that females consistently bore a higher burden of mental disorders as measured by age-standardized rates. This disparity illuminates complex socio-cultural, biological, and psychological factors contributing to women’s elevated vulnerability. Understanding these dynamics can help shape gender-sensitive mental health policies and ensure equitable access to care and resources.

Delving deeper into specific mental disorder subtypes, major depressive disorder and anxiety disorders emerged as the leading contributors to the mental health burden, possessing the highest age-standardized rates worldwide. Major depressive disorder, in particular, ranked first in the burden across 13 of 21 global regions, reaffirming its role as a profound public health challenge. Notably, anxiety disorders also exhibited the most significant increase in DALYs over time, highlighting their growing societal impact.

Intriguingly, the overall upward trend in DALYs was not uniform across all mental disorder subtypes. This heterogeneity suggests variations in disease detection, treatment efficacy, and possibly differing etiological factors. These nuances are critical for guiding resource allocation and prioritizing disorder-specific interventions that can more effectively mitigate the global mental health burden.

At the heart of these findings is the recognition that mental disorders represent an escalating global health crisis with widespread implications for societies and healthcare systems. The study’s longitudinal design, encompassing 31 years of data, enables an appreciation not only of current disease magnitude but also of evolving trends, enabling policymakers and healthcare providers to anticipate future challenges with greater precision.

The COVID-19 pandemic’s role as a catalyst exacerbating mental health issues is particularly salient. Social isolation, economic uncertainty, and disruption of health services during this period likely intensified mental health struggles worldwide. The pandemic thus underscores the urgency for integrating mental health support into broader emergency preparedness and response frameworks.

Given these insights, the authors advocate for comprehensive mental health strategies encompassing knowledge dissemination, prevention initiatives, and the development of tailored interventions. Prioritizing high-SDI regions and focusing on vulnerable populations, especially women, are essential steps toward reducing disparities and alleviating the growing burden.

Moreover, the study exemplifies the power of robust epidemiological surveillance and advanced analytic techniques, such as joinpoint regression, in illuminating disease trajectories. These methods offer valuable tools for dynamically monitoring public health trends and informing evidence-based decision-making for mental health.

Ultimately, this extensive evaluation from the GBD 2021 provides a stark reminder of the unmet needs in mental health care and the imperative for global collaboration. Addressing these challenges demands multi-sectoral approaches encompassing policy reform, increased funding, research investment, and destigmatization efforts to foster environments where mental well-being can thrive.

As mental disorders continue to intensify in prevalence and impact, this pivotal research beckons the scientific community, health practitioners, and governments to urgently recalibrate priorities. Only through coordinated action anchored in rigorous data and nuanced understanding can the global burden of mental disorders be effectively tackled in the decades ahead.

Subject of Research: Global burden and trends of mental disorders across 204 countries and territories from 1990 to 2021, including the impact of COVID-19.

Article Title: Global burden of mental disorders in 204 countries and territories, 1990–2021: results from the global burden of disease study 2021

Article References:
Fan, Y., Fan, A., Yang, Z. et al. Global burden of mental disorders in 204 countries and territories, 1990–2021: results from the global burden of disease study 2021. BMC Psychiatry 25, 486 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12888-025-06932-y

Image Credits: AI Generated

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12888-025-06932-y

The global landscape of suicide reveals critical differences in rates between genders. It is documented that males die from suicide at rates more than double that of females. However, the dynamics of suicide attempts present an intriguing contrast; females are significantly more likely to attempt suicide, with a staggering 49% greater likelihood compared to their male counterparts. The disparities underline complex socio-cultural factors influencing mental health narratives and the accessibility of support systems across various populations.

Access to lethal means plays a pivotal role in suicide outcomes. Research indicates that firearms are a leading method of suicide for both genders, with a notable prevalence in countries like the United States. In contrast to the global average where 10% of male suicides and 3% of female suicides involve guns, such statistics sharply increase in the U.S. to 55% for males and 31% for females. These figures call for a critical evaluation of firearm access and regulations as they relate to mental health crises and suicide prevention.

An important aspect of the recent findings is the decline in the global age-standardized death rate for suicide, which decreased by almost 40% from 1990 to 2021. This statistic is an optimistic indicator of effective interventions aimed at reducing suicide rates worldwide. The reduction was particularly pronounced among females, who saw more than a 50% decline, compared to almost a 34% decline for males. This suggests that outreach programs and enhanced mental health support directed toward females may be yielding significant results.

However, this positive trend isn’t uniformly experienced. Certain regions, notably Central and Andean Latin America, have witnessed alarming increases in suicide rates. Central Latin America has experienced a staggering increase of 39%, with specific countries like Mexico experiencing a 123% rise in female suicides. These troubling statistics highlight the importance of localized mental health initiatives that can address specific cultural and regional challenges impacting suicide rates.

Globally, East Asia stands out with a remarkable 66% decline in suicide rates, particularly driven by interventions in China. This serves as a case study for the potential effectiveness of tailored mental health programs. Insights from these successes can be utilized to inform strategies in regions struggling with increased rates of suicide, potentially leading to broader reductions in mortality.

Despite significant progress in curbing suicide deaths across various demographics, certain populations remain vulnerable. The disparity in suicide rates based on socio-economic status indicates a strong link between poverty, social deprivation, and mental health crises. For populations facing economic instability, the burden of mental health disorders often intensifies, culminating in higher suicide rates. This complex interplay of economic and mental health factors necessitates a comprehensive approach incorporating social supports alongside mental health services.

Alongside these findings, the study highlights the critical need to dismantle the stigma surrounding mental health and suicide. Historically, cultural misconceptions and societal taboos have prevented individuals from seeking help, often exacerbating mental health crises. Efforts to create awareness and normalize discussions about mental health are essential to encouraging individuals to access support systems without fear of judgement or stigma.

One of the stark findings from this study is the alarming difference in the methods chosen by males and females in suicide attempts. Evidence suggests that men are more likely to use violent and lethal means, such as firearms, while women often resort to less fatal methods, such as poisoning or overdosing. This gender disparity not only influences outcomes but also indicates varying underlying psychological and sociocultural factors influencing suicidal behavior.

Reflecting on the age at which individuals are dying by suicide, the trends indicate a troubling shift towards older demographics. The average age at death from suicide has risen, with males averaging 47 years and females nearly 47 years by 2021. This rising age suggests that issues related to mental health are becoming pervasive across a broader span of life stages, necessitating age-specific prevention strategies and resources at different life stages.

Additionally, the study reveals a critical need for intervention strategies that target specific demographics and regional issues. Data-driven approaches to suicide prevention can help policymakers and health practitioners develop tailored strategies that address the unique factors influencing suicidal behavior in their populations.

In conclusion, while significant progress has been made in the fight against suicide globally, the ongoing crisis is far from over. Continued efforts to destigmatize mental health conversations, improve access to mental health care, and target interventions based on specific regional and demographic needs are essential. Suicide prevention must be a community-focused endeavor, bringing together resources, awareness, and support to effectively address and reduce these devastating outcomes.

This comprehensive understanding of the patterns and trends of suicide will be crucial in shaping future prevention strategies and interventions aimed at saving lives around the world. By synthesizing data with actionable insights, we can advance the mission of decreasing suicide rates and providing much-needed support to vulnerable populations.

Subject of Research: People
Article Title: About 740,000 global deaths from suicide occur annually—that’s one death every 43 seconds
News Publication Date: 19-Feb-2025
Web References: The Lancet Public Health
References: DOI
Image Credits: N/A
Keywords: Suicide, Mental Health, Intervention, Prevention, Gender Differences, Global Health, Social Issues, Healthcare, Firearm Access, Demographics, Awareness, Data Analysis.

A critical barrier identified in the study is the lack of recognition among individuals regarding the necessity for mental health treatment. This awareness is paramount for prompting individuals to seek help; however, the research highlights a sizable gap even among those who do reach out to the healthcare system. Many patients initiating contact with healthcare providers often find themselves not receiving adequate treatment, underscoring an urgent need for systemic improvement.

Lead author Dr. Daniel Vigo, an associate professor in the Department of Psychiatry and the School of Population and Public Health at UBC, emphasized the significance of their findings, stating, “This survey data has allowed us to create the only effective treatment indicator that exists for mental health and substance use.” The outcomes of this study provide essential data-driven insights, which can help guide policy makers in making informed decisions regarding mental health funding and resource allocation. In an area where strategic decisions have often lacked empirical underpinning, this research represents a monumental step forward.

The study’s backdrop is rooted in the World Health Organization-World Mental Health Surveys Initiative, which intends to gather thorough data about the prevalence, severity, and treatment of mental disorders on a global scale. The current analysis pays special attention to survey participants diagnosed with disorders as classified by the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders-IV, a standard diagnostic tool utilized widely among mental health professionals from 1994 to 2013. By focusing on these well-defined criteria, the research endeavors to present a clear understanding of patient experiences as they navigate the often complex mental health care landscape.

To gain nuanced insights into treatment accessibility, the research team, which includes Dr. Ronald Kessler from Harvard, meticulously examined a total of four crucial steps in the treatment process. The journey toward effective treatment encompasses: recognizing the need for treatment, making contact with the healthcare system, receiving an adequate minimum level of treatment, and ultimately, receiving effective treatment. The analysis brought forth striking statistics that delineate the challenges at every stage, revealing significant attrition rates that contribute to the disconcerting overall figure of only 6.9 percent securing effective treatment.

The data indicated a conspicuous drop-off at every step of the treatment journey. Alarmingly, only 46.5 percent of individuals who met the criteria for a mental health disorder acknowledged their need for treatment. Of those who did recognize their need, a mere 34.1 percent took the crucial step of reaching out to the medical system for assistance. Among those who sought help, a commendable 82.9 percent received a minimum level of adequate treatment; however, a troubling 47 percent of individuals fallen short of receiving effective treatment despite undergoing minimally adequate care.

This research elucidates the significant hurdles that persist in the mental health treatment framework, particularly after patients have contacted the healthcare system yet before they access effective treatment. Dr. Vigo pointed out the vital role that general practitioners and family doctors play, as they often serve as the initial point of contact with the healthcare system. The necessity for these primary care providers to possess the requisite training and expertise in diagnosing and managing mild to moderate mental health conditions is paramount. Training is equally important for identifying cases that necessitate referrals to specialized mental health services, an essential aspect of refining the existing healthcare system.

As Dr. Vigo poignantly remarked, “Improving the ability of these general practitioners and family doctors to diagnose and treat the mild to moderate forms, and to know when to refer more severely affected folks to specialists, becomes the cornerstone of the system.” This commentary reflects not only the immediate need for educational enhancements within primary care settings but also positions improved diagnosis and treatment protocols as foundational to establishing an effective mental healthcare framework.

The findings of this pivotal research, which is published in JAMA Psychiatry, open the dialogue for policymakers to reevaluate and prioritize specific investment strategies that target the gaps identified in mental health care services. By highlighting discrepancies in service availability and treatment outcomes across various disorders such as bipolar disorder and addiction, the study empowers stakeholders to take actionable steps that could potentially yield significant improvements in care delivery.

In a broader context, this research can prompt a global reassessment of mental health policies, emphasizing a data-driven approach aimed at improving access to treatment. As awareness of mental health issues continues to grow, it becomes increasingly important for decision-makers and healthcare professionals to collaborate effectively in addressing the complex landscape of mental health care inadequacies.

At its core, the researchers advocate for a systemic transformation that incorporates both clinical insight and empirical data to construct a more responsive mental health treatment framework. Such transformations are not merely beneficial—they are essential for ensuring that vulnerable populations receive the help they desperately need and deserve. As society continues to grapple with escalating mental health issues, this study serves as a critical reminder of the stark realities faced by those in need of effective treatment and the urgent need for comprehensive reforms in mental healthcare provision.

This research underscores a sobering reality: that despite the growing recognition of mental health as a critical public health issue, the infrastructure supporting treatment accessibility and effectiveness requires profound enhancement. By shedding light on the mechanisms of treatment attrition and the systemic barriers that exist, researchers and policymakers can work in concert to forge pathways that lead to better health outcomes for individuals grappling with mental health and substance-use disorders.

Subject of Research: People
Article Title: Effective Treatment for Mental and Substance Use Disorders in 21 Countries
News Publication Date: 5-Feb-2025
Web References: JAMA Psychiatry
References: Frontiers in Mental Health
Image Credits: N/A

Keywords: mental health, effective treatment, substance use, healthcare policy, anxiety disorders, medical treatments, psychological science.