The increasing recognition of mental health as a fundamental component of overall well-being necessitates an urgent examination of the barriers that prevent equitable access to care. Those who typically bear the brunt of these inequalities include individuals from low-income backgrounds, racial and ethnic minorities, the homeless, and those living with chronic illnesses. Such groups often experience compounded challenges that hinder their ability to seek and receive the mental health services they require.

One of the poignant findings from the review is the need for tailored interventions that address the unique needs of these vulnerable populations. Zupančič and Erjavec highlight the importance of culturally sensitive approaches, which not only increase the likelihood of individuals engaging with mental health services but also improve overall treatment outcomes. By recognizing the cultural context of mental health, service providers can foster a more inclusive environment that is conducive to healing and recovery.

Moreover, the research underscores the role of stigma as a formidable barrier to mental health care access. The negative perceptions surrounding mental illness can deter individuals from seeking help, leading to further isolation and deterioration of mental health. Therefore, initiatives aimed at reducing stigma, through community engagement and awareness campaigns, are crucial in encouraging individuals to pursue the support they need. The authors suggest that these campaigns should be carefully crafted to resonate with the specific communities they aim to serve, ensuring that the messaging is relatable and impactful.

In addition to addressing stigma, the review examines the significance of integrating mental health services within primary health care settings. By embedding mental health care into the existing health care framework, barriers related to access and availability can be significantly reduced. This integrated approach is particularly beneficial for medically vulnerable adults, who may already be receiving care for other health issues and would benefit from a holistic treatment model. This strategy not only simplifies the care navigation process but also enhances the communication and partnership between different health professionals involved in a patient’s care.

Zupančič and Erjavec also draw attention to the importance of policy interventions that can enforce systemic changes in the mental health care landscape. Effective mental health policies can lead to increased funding for resources, better training for health care providers, and improved data collection that drives research and development in this field. The authors advocate for informed policy-making that takes into account the diverse needs of marginalized populations, ensuring that care models are adaptable and responsive.

The role of technology in bridging the gap in mental health care access is another key theme in the review. Telehealth and digital platforms have emerged as valuable tools that can extend services to individuals who are unable to access traditional face-to-face care. This shift toward technology-driven solutions is particularly relevant in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, which has escalated mental health concerns while simultaneously limiting in-person interactions. The review highlights the potential of these technologies to reach marginalized communities, particularly in rural or underserved areas where mental health resources may be scarce.

Furthermore, the research presents evidence supporting community-based interventions as effective countermeasures against disparities in mental health care. Programs that empower local organizations to provide mental health support can foster a sense of ownership within communities, encouraging individuals to seek help. These grassroots initiatives often resonate more profoundly with marginalized populations, as they are rooted in shared experiences and understanding.

The findings also elucidate the necessity of ongoing education and training for mental health professionals. Understanding the cultural competencies and social determinants of health that affect marginalized groups is imperative for delivering effective care. Continuous professional development can ensure that practitioners remain informed about best practices and emerging trends in mental health treatment, ultimately leading to improved outcomes.

In examining the potential for intersectional approaches, Zupančič and Erjavec advocate for a framework that considers how various social identities contribute to the experiences of discrimination and disadvantage. This perspective acknowledges the complexity of mental health disparities and reinforces the need for multifaceted responses that consider race, gender, socioeconomic status, and other intersecting factors.

The comprehensive nature of this systematic review not only sheds light on the barriers faced by marginalized adults but also offers a roadmap for actionable solutions that can be implemented across various settings. By centering the voices and experiences of those affected, the research emphasizes the importance of collaborative efforts in crafting interventions that are genuinely responsive to the needs of vulnerable populations.

Ultimately, Zupančič and Erjavec’s work serves as a critical resource for policymakers, researchers, and practitioners striving to build a more equitable mental health care system. Their findings underscore the urgency of addressing disparities and highlight the diverse strategies that can be employed to make meaningful progress. As awareness continues to grow, it is crucial to prioritize mental health equity and ensure that every individual, regardless of their background, has the opportunity to receive the care they deserve.

As we look towards the future, ongoing research and innovation in mental health care will be vital in overcoming systemic barriers and implementing effective countermeasures. With increased commitment from all stakeholders, there is hope for a transformation in mental health care that can reach even the most marginalized populations, fostering resilience, recovery, and overall well-being.

Subject of Research: Inequalities in mental health care for socially marginalized or medically vulnerable adults.

Article Title: The range of countermeasures to reduce inequalities in mental health care for socially marginalized or medically vulnerable adults: a PRISMA systematic review.

Article References:

Zupančič, V., Erjavec, K. The range of countermeasures to reduce inequalities in mental health care for socially marginalized or medically vulnerable adults: a PRISMA systematic review. BMC Health Serv Res (2026). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-026-14001-7

Image Credits: AI Generated

DOI: 10.1186/s12913-026-14001-7

Keywords: Mental health disparities, marginalized populations, access to care, systematic review, PRISMA guidelines, community-based interventions, culturally sensitive approaches, telehealth, health policy.

Medical students are widely recognized as a group at high risk for mental health challenges, with depression rates significantly exceeding those of the general population. This troubling statistic has prompted an urgent call for research that can illuminate the underlying psychological mechanisms at play. The study led by Lin, Yu, and Liu et al. targets this very need, moving beyond simplistic cause-and-effect frameworks to explore the nuanced, reciprocal relationships between depressive symptoms, the ability to adapt mentally and emotionally in the face of stress—termed psychological flexibility—and the vital human quest for meaning in life.

Psychological flexibility, a concept rooted in acceptance and commitment therapy (ACT), refers to one’s capacity to stay present, accept thoughts and feelings without undue avoidance or struggle, and commit to behaviors aligned with deeply held values. This construct has garnered increasing attention for its potential role in buffering against psychological distress. By measuring psychological flexibility longitudinally and relating these measures to depressive symptoms and meaning-making, the study’s cross-lagged analysis enables a temporal examination of how changes in one domain influence the others over time.

At the heart of this exploration is the notion of meaning in life, a deeply existential element that has long been theorized to protect against mental health disorders. Framing meaning as a dynamic, evolving construct rather than a static trait, the researchers hypothesized that fluctuations in one’s perceived significance and purpose could exert a profound influence on depressive symptoms and psychological adaptability. The intricate dance between these variables over successive time points was systematically charted using advanced statistical models designed to parse out directional effects and bidirectional causality.

The sample consisted of medical students navigating intense academic pressures, social isolation, and existential uncertainty—an ideal demographic for unraveling how psychological flexibility and life’s meaning interplay amid psychological strain. The longitudinal design, spanning multiple assessment waves, allowed for an unprecedented examination of temporal precedence: did declining psychological flexibility predict subsequent rises in depression, or was diminished meaning in life the leading indicator? Perhaps more strikingly, could enhancing meaning and flexibility serve as protective mechanisms that preempt depressive escalation?

Findings reveal a complex, reciprocal relationship. Lower levels of meaning in life at earlier time points forecasted increased depressive symptoms later, underscoring the protective function of existential fulfillment. Conversely, elevated depression predicted subsequent reductions in psychological flexibility, highlighting the erosive impact of depressive states on adaptive mental processes. Notably, psychological flexibility emerged as a mediator, bridging the pathway between meaning and depression, suggesting that fostering flexibility could attenuate the detrimental cycle that connects loss of meaning to depressive episodes.

This tripartite model offers a compelling framework for clinical interventions targeting medical students and potentially other populations suffering from mood disorders. By emphasizing psychological flexibility and life’s meaning as key therapeutic targets, programs can be tailored to promote resilience through mindful acceptance practices and value-driven goal setting. The study thus provides empirical backing for integrative mental health approaches that seek not only symptom reduction but the cultivation of enriching, purpose-centered lives.

Methodologically, the use of cross-lagged panel modeling is a standout feature of the research, allowing for simultaneous evaluation of reciprocal causation and temporal sequencing. This approach overcomes limitations of traditional correlational studies that cannot disentangle directionality or dynamic interplay. By capturing snapshots of depressive symptomatology, cognitive flexibility, and existential meaning across multiple time points, the researchers were able to build a robust, predictive model of psychological health development in this high-stress cohort.

The study also breaks new ground by situating psychological flexibility as a dynamic mediational mechanism rather than a static personality trait. This conceptual shift expands the therapeutic potential of interventions like ACT by identifying psychological flexibility as a modifiable process capable of altering the trajectory from loss of meaning to depressive decline. Such insights push the boundary for mental health research into a more integrative, process-based understanding of psychopathology.

Another critical implication touches on medical education itself. The research highlights an urgent need for curricula and institutional supports that foster psychological flexibility and meaningful engagement among students. Creating environments that validate individual purpose and promote adaptive coping skills could significantly reduce depressive incidence, thereby enhancing both student well-being and future patient care quality.

This research invites broader reflection on how modern educational systems and workplaces might inadvertently undermine intrinsic meaning and adaptive flexibility, contributing to mental health crises. It suggests a paradigm shift towards environments encouraging self-transcendence, mindfulness, and existential inquiry could be a crucial antidote to widespread depressive morbidity in high-performance settings.

While the study provides compelling evidence, it also acknowledges limitations inherent in self-report measures and the particular demographic focus on medical students, calling for replication and expansion across diverse populations and cultures. Future research routes may involve experimental designs testing targeted flexibility-building interventions or exploring biological correlates of these psychological processes.

In sum, this pioneering investigation uncovers a dynamic, interlocking relationship between depression, psychological flexibility, and meaning in life, offering vital clues for mental health promotion among medical students. Its sophisticated longitudinal methodology and integrative theoretical framing mark a significant stride forward in decoding the psychological architecture underpinning resilience and vulnerability.

As the global community grapples with rising mental health challenges exacerbated by unprecedented social and professional pressures, such insights are both timely and transformative. By charting pathways toward enhanced psychological flexibility and enriched meaning, this work not only deepens scientific understanding but lays a foundation for impactful, human-centered mental health innovations in education and beyond.

The study stands as a beacon of hope and scientific rigor, illuminating routes through the complexities of human suffering towards pathways of healing and purposeful flourishing for the next generation of healthcare professionals and potentially all individuals navigating the often turbulent waters of psychological distress.

Subject of Research: The dynamic relationships among depression, psychological flexibility, and meaning in life in medical students.

Article Title: The dynamic association between depression, psychological flexibility, and meaning in life among medical students: a cross-lagged analysis.

Article References:
Lin, M., Yu, H., Liu, M. et al. The dynamic association between depression, psychological flexibility, and meaning in life among medical students: a cross-lagged analysis. BMC Psychol 13, 1267 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40359-025-03596-x

Image Credits: AI Generated

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s40359-025-03596-x

Climate-induced natural disasters—ranging from wildfires and hurricanes to prolonged droughts and flooding—constitute immediate traumatic events with severe psychological consequences. These extreme weather events cause acute anxiety, post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), depression, and elevated suicide rates, disproportionately affecting populations with pre-existing vulnerabilities. The researchers emphasize that the relentless frequency and intensity of such disasters deny affected individuals adequate recovery time, compounding cumulative psychological stress and chronic mental health disorders.

Particularly vulnerable are individuals with socioeconomic disadvantages, such as low-income groups, indigenous populations, children, the elderly, and those with pre-existing mental health conditions. Poverty often prevents access to adequate healthcare, increases exposure to climate hazards due to substandard housing or hazardous geographical locations, and limits social support systems, all of which amplify mental health risks during environmental crises. The systematic review underscores that mental health responses cannot be disentangled from social determinants of health in the context of climate change.

Beyond the immediate trauma of disasters, the slow-moving specter of climate change advances chronic psychological stressors. The subtle yet persistent impacts—including food and water insecurity, displacement and forced migration, loss of livelihoods, and a sense of ecological grief—fuel anxieties that infiltrate everyday mental well-being. Ecological grief, a relatively new psychological term, describes the mourning people experience due to environmental degradation and the loss of familiar natural landscapes, a phenomenon with escalating prevalence among indigenous communities closely connected to their environment.

The research also highlights intergenerational disparities in mental health impacts. Children and adolescents manifest heightened vulnerability due to developmental sensitivities, yet they often face insufficient recognition and support for climate-induced mental health challenges. Furthermore, the anticipation of future climate catastrophes provokes anxiety and despair in younger generations—a phenomenon labeled “climate anxiety”—which can result in feelings of helplessness and loss of agency that require urgent attention from mental health professionals and policymakers.

Methodologically, the systematic review analyzed a diverse spectrum of studies spanning multiple disciplines, including psychology, environmental science, public health, and social sciences. By synthesizing data extracted from longitudinal cohort studies, cross-sectional surveys, and qualitative interviews, the authors offer a comprehensive, evidence-based portrait of how climate change intersects with mental health outcomes. This integrative approach underscores the necessity of multidisciplinary strategies to address the escalating mental health burden.

One of the salient technical discussions in the review pertains to neurobiological mechanisms linking climate-related stressors to mental health disorders. The authors discuss how chronic stress from climate-related adversities activates the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis, elevating cortisol secretion, which, when sustained, can lead to neural alterations associated with anxiety and depression. This scientific insight provides a biological explanation for the increasing prevalence of mental health disorders in populations continuously exposed to climate instability.

Another significant point of emphasis is the role of community resilience and social capital in mitigating mental health risks. Communities with robust social networks, effective communication, and cultural cohesion display better psychological outcomes following climate-related events. The systematic review calls for mental health interventions to incorporate community-based, culturally sensitive frameworks that empower resilience rather than perpetuate vulnerability.

The review also stresses the critical importance of integrating mental health support into disaster preparedness and climate adaptation policies. Traditional disaster response often prioritizes physical safety and infrastructure recovery, overlooking psychosocial support. The authors advocate for embedding mental health services into emergency response frameworks with adequate training for responders, sustainable funding, and accessible mental healthcare systems targeted at vulnerable groups.

Moreover, the interplay between climate change, forced displacement, and mental health figures prominently in the review. As rising sea levels, desertification, and subsistence farming failures push populations to migrate, forced displacement engenders multifaceted psychological challenges, including identity loss, cultural disintegration, and chronic uncertainty. The authors highlight the need for mental health care programs tailored for climate migrants and displaced persons, given their unique vulnerabilities and complex trauma profiles.

Climate change’s intersectionality with mental health also magnifies existing inequities within healthcare access and social justice. Marginalized populations often inhabit ecological frontline zones yet face disproportionate barriers to mental healthcare. The review calls for policy reforms to bridge these disparities by recognizing climate change as a social justice issue intricately linked with health equity.

In a forward-looking perspective, the review encourages the scientific community to develop innovative predictive models that incorporate psychoclimatic indicators—variables blending psychological and climatic data—to anticipate mental health trends linked with environmental changes. Such models could facilitate more proactive mental health services planning, potentially averting crises before they escalate.

The findings underscore the urgency for global governance frameworks to recognize mental health as a pivotal aspect of climate action agendas. International climate treaties and sustainable development goals must incorporate comprehensive mental health strategies to address the psychological toll of climate change systematically. The authors stress that without this integration, climate policies risk neglecting a critical dimension of human health and resilience.

In conclusion, Mahmood and colleagues’ systematic review serves as a critical wake-up call about the mental health consequences of climate change among vulnerable groups. By bridging cutting-edge neurobiological insights, social determinants, and community resilience concepts, the study lays a foundation for multidisciplinary solutions. This research not only advances scientific understanding but also provides a blueprint for policymakers, mental health practitioners, and communities to collaboratively confront an invisible but escalating pandemic born of our changing planet.

As societies urgently mobilize to combat the physical effects of climate change, equal emphasis must be placed on mental health interventions. Only by acknowledging and addressing the profound psychological impacts can humanity hope to build truly sustainable and resilient futures for all, especially the most vulnerable among us.

Subject of Research: The impact of climate change on mental health in vulnerable groups

Article Title: The impact of climate change on mental health in vulnerable groups: a systematic review

Article References: Mahmood, R., Clery, P., Yang, J.C. et al. The impact of climate change on mental health in vulnerable groups: a systematic review. BMC Psychol 13, 1208 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40359-025-03497-z

Image Credits: AI Generated

The study aims to explore the co-creation of mental health promotion and prevention interventions specifically tailored for individuals facing social vulnerability. Co-creation, a collaborative approach often involving stakeholders in the design and implementation of health initiatives, has the potential to ensure that the specific needs of diverse populations are met. The innovative research framework outlined by the authors emphasizes that genuine participation of vulnerable groups can substantially enhance the relevance and efficacy of mental health interventions.

By employing a mixed-methods approach, the researchers intend to provide a comprehensive understanding of the factors affecting mental health in vulnerable populations. This methodology combines both qualitative and quantitative data collection techniques, allowing for a robust analysis that can delve into the deeper narratives of individuals’ experiences while also providing statistical evidence regarding mental health outcomes. This multidimensional perspective is particularly vital when aiming to address the nuanced needs of at-risk groups.

Within the proposed study, the implementation phase will involve a series of workshops and collaborative sessions that directly engage vulnerable populations. During these interactions, participants will not only contribute insights into their mental health needs but also co-design the interventions that will serve those needs most effectively. This hands-on involvement can foster a sense of ownership among participants, ultimately leading to more sustainable and impactful mental health strategies.

An essential aspect of this research is the participatory evaluation component, which aims to assess the effectiveness of the co-created interventions over time. The evaluation framework will not only focus on the outcomes of mental health interventions but will also consider the processes of co-creation itself. By examining how collaborative efforts influence the success of the initiatives, the researchers aim to generate valuable insights that could guide future mental health promotion efforts.

The urgency of addressing mental health in vulnerable populations is starkly illustrated by the increasing rates of mental disorders across Europe, especially in the aftermath of the COVID-19 pandemic. Reports have highlighted how social isolation, economic uncertainty, and disruptions to daily life have exacerbated mental health issues in various communities. The timely nature of this study cannot be overstated, as it aligns with the pressing need for innovative solutions to combat the rising tide of mental health challenges.

Furthermore, the implications of this research extend beyond immediate mental health outcomes. By prioritizing the voices of those affected by mental health issues, the study seeks to contribute to broader societal changes that effectively integrate mental health into public health strategies. The objective is to not only alleviate individual suffering but also to drive systemic shifts that enhance mental health support across localized communities.

In understanding the social determinants of mental health, the researchers are also keen to address structural barriers that have historically marginalized or overlooked certain populations. Issues such as poverty, discrimination, and lack of access to quality health services play significant roles in shaping mental health outcomes. The co-creation process aims to critically engage with these determinants, ensuring that interventions are mindful of and responsive to the socio-economic context of participants.

The proposed research protocol embodies a forward-thinking approach that resonates with the principles of equity and inclusiveness. By allowing vulnerable groups to take the lead in articulating their mental health needs, the study encourages a crucial paradigm shift away from top-down interventions. This model promotes a culture of empathy and understanding, which can reverberate throughout the healthcare system and society at large.

As the study progresses, the researchers will gather insights not only for academic discourse but also for actionable policy recommendations aimed at improving mental health services. The findings could provide a blueprint for healthcare systems across Europe, emphasizing the importance of community involvement in creating tailored mental health solutions.

In summary, the work undertaken by Teixeira and colleagues signifies a critical step towards reconceptualizing mental health promotion strategies in Europe. By centering the voices of vulnerable populations and exploring the co-creation of interventions, this research holds the promise of fostering healthier, more resilient communities.

In conclusion, this mixed-methods study protocol stands as an innovative approach to mental health promotion among vulnerable groups in Europe. The combination of co-creation and participatory evaluation offers a pathway to design interventions that are not only effective but also reflective of the unique needs of various populations. As mental health continues to take center stage in public health discourse, initiatives such as this one signal hope for creating a future where mental health support is accessible, inclusive, and equitable for all.

Subject of Research: Co-creating mental health promotion and prevention interventions with groups in vulnerable situations in Europe

Article Title: Co-creating mental health promotion and prevention interventions with groups in vulnerable situations in Europe: a mixed-methods study protocol for co-creation implementation and participatory evaluation

Article References:

Teixeira, R., de Freitas, C., Sanna, L. et al. Co-creating mental health promotion and prevention interventions with groups in vulnerable situations in Europe: a mixed-methods study protocol for co-creation implementation and participatory evaluation.
Health Res Policy Sys 23, 87 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12961-025-01349-1

Image Credits: AI Generated

DOI: 10.1186/s12961-025-01349-1

Keywords: mental health, vulnerable populations, co-creation, intervention, participatory evaluation, public health, Europe, mixed-methods, community health

The study deftly explores the lived experiences of those most affected by climate change—individuals in at-risk communities. As climates worsen, these populations experience displacement, loss of livelihood, and increased natural disasters, all of which compound their mental health burdens. According to the study, these adverse experiences lessen their resilience, exacerbate feelings of helplessness, and lead to heightened anxiety and depression. The emotional toll can overshadow the immediate physical dangers posed by climate change, yet it remains a largely invisible crisis.

An essential aspect of Asim and Ilyas’s research is the emphasis on qualitative data derived from personal narratives. Interviews with individuals from various backgrounds unveil a tapestry of emotional distress woven through the everyday realities of climate unpredictability. These narratives highlight a fundamental paradox: while climate change is a global phenomenon, its effects are distinctly personal and experienced on an individual level. It challenges the traditional paradigm of climate discussions, urging us to reframe the conversation around climate impacts in terms of human emotion and psychological viability.

The researchers categorize the psychological responses into three main areas: direct impacts, indirect impacts, and societal repercussions. Direct impacts stem from events such as extreme weather incidents, which can instill acute trauma. Indirect impacts arise from ongoing environmental degradation and its slow, relentless nature—such as droughts or declining agricultural productivity—leading to long-term stress. Lastly, societal repercussions encompass the broader context of climate change, affecting community dynamics, social cohesion, and support systems, yielding further mental health strain.

Another compelling finding of the study is the varying intensity of these psychological impacts. Not all individuals in at-risk populations respond to climate change in the same way; factors such as socioeconomic status, cultural background, and prior trauma experiences dynamically shape their reactions. For instance, individuals with preexisting mental health conditions may find their symptoms escalating under climate-induced stressors, while others with robust community networks may display enhanced resilience, showcasing a divergent spectrum of psychological responses within the same environmental context.

The implications of these findings extend far beyond individual or community well-being. Policymakers must recognize that mental health crises are likely to compound as climate change progresses. Failure to address these realities could lead to exacerbated societal challenges, including increased healthcare costs, demands on social services, and potential uprisings driven by widespread despair. Thus, it is critical for policy frameworks to incorporate mental health strategies specifically aimed at mitigating climate impacts.

Moreover, the study serves as a clarion call for fundamental shifts among mental health professionals. As the climate crisis unfolds, mental health practitioners must arm themselves with strategies that integrate environmental dimensions into their scope of practice. Training programs and awareness initiatives should emphasize understanding the unique stressors linked to climate change, fostering a comprehensive approach to therapy and care that reflects the intricate relationship between environmental factors and mental wellbeing.

One progressive step forward mentioned by Asim and Ilyas is the development of therapeutic models specifically designed to support those grappling with climate-related stress. These models could incorporate eco-therapy practices, community resilience building, and collective support frameworks. By crafting spaces for shared experiences, healing can commence through communal validation of feelings and collective problem-solving, encouraging affected populations to rebuild within their existing environments despite overwhelming odds.

Additionally, the research underscores an urgent need for public awareness campaigns tailored to both climate realities and mental health impacts. As wider society begins to confront the overwhelming evidence of climate change, informing the public about its psychological ramifications could lead to greater empathy and less stigma for those affected. There lies an opportunity to cultivate supportive communities through education, connecting individuals with shared experiences and resources.

Perhaps one of the most critical outcomes of Asim and Ilyas’s study is the potential to merge climate action with mental health advocacy. The rising understanding that climate change is not merely an environmental problem but is intrinsically linked to human psychological health may inspire a synergistic approach. Mental health advocates and climate activists could unite to ensure that both concerns are addressed holistically, framing the fight against climate change as a fight for both physical and mental well-being.

To conclude, Asim and Ilyas’s research sheds light on a crucial intersection of climate impact and mental health. As the climate crisis continues to unfold with increasing urgency, it is imperative that discussions around climate change expand to include the psychological toll it exacts on vulnerable populations. Understanding the lived experiences of those in at-risk communities not only enriches the academic dialogue surrounding climate change but also reinforces the necessity for a holistic approach to policy, healthcare, and community support. By grounding the conversation in human experiences, we may recalibrate our collective approach to dealing with this unprecedented challenge.

Subject of Research: Mental health impacts of climate change on at-risk populations

Article Title: Understanding mental health impacts of climate change through lived experiences in at risk populations

Article References:

Asim, J., Ilyas, U. Understanding mental health impacts of climate change through lived experiences in at risk populations.
Discov Psychol 5, 40 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1007/s44202-025-00356-1

Image Credits: AI Generated

DOI: 10.1007/s44202-025-00356-1

Keywords: climate change, mental health, at-risk populations, qualitative research, psychology, community resilience, policy implications