Related Articles
An analysis on the role of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists in cognitive and mental health disorders
Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs) are novel drugs approved for diabetes and obesity. They are acknowledged as a major scientific breakthrough. In addition to their metabolic effects, these medications act on other bodily systems involved in the physiopathology of various neurological and psychiatric disorders. Several stakeholders are calling for more research to investigate the repurposing potential of GLP-1RAs in cognitive and mental disorders, while others advocate for a better assessment of their safety profile from a neuropsychiatric perspective. In this Analysis, we searched for relevant literature on the effects of GLP-1RAs across a range of illnesses, gathering and describing the available pre-clinical and mechanistic (278 studies) and clinical (96 studies) evidence for cognitive disorders, substance-use disorders, psychotic disorders, mood and anxiety disorders, eating disorders, and others. By leveraging translational insights from these data, we consider potential implications for clinical practice and propose avenues for further research.
Leveraging the collaborative power of AI and citizen science for sustainable development
Both artificial intelligence (AI) and citizen science hold immense potential for addressing major sustainability challenges from health to climate change. Alongside their individual benefits, when combined, they offer considerable synergies that can aid in both better monitoring of, and achieving, sustainable development. While AI has already been integrated into citizen science projects such as through automated classification and identification, the integration of citizen science approaches into AI is lacking. This integration has, however, the potential to address some of the major challenges associated with AI such as social bias, which could accelerate progress towards achieving sustainable development.
Dynamic effects of psychiatric vulnerability, loneliness and isolation on distress during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic
The COVID-19 pandemic’s impact on mental health is challenging to quantify because pre-existing risk, disease burden and public policy varied across individuals, time and regions. Longitudinal, within-person analyses can determine whether pandemic-related changes in social isolation impacted mental health. We analyzed time-varying associations between psychiatric vulnerability, loneliness, psychological distress and social distancing in a US-based study during the first year of the pandemic. We surveyed 3,655 participants about psychological health and COVID-19-related circumstances every 2 weeks for 6 months. We combined self-reports with regional social distancing estimates and a classifier that predicted probability of psychiatric diagnosis at enrollment. Loneliness and psychiatric vulnerability both impacted psychological distress. Loneliness and distress were also linked to social isolation and stress associated with distancing, and psychiatric vulnerability shaped how regional distancing affected loneliness across time. Public health policies should address loneliness when encouraging social distancing, particularly in those at risk for psychiatric conditions.
Trust in scientists and their role in society across 68 countries
Science is crucial for evidence-based decision-making. Public trust in scientists can help decision makers act on the basis of the best available evidence, especially during crises. However, in recent years the epistemic authority of science has been challenged, causing concerns about low public trust in scientists. We interrogated these concerns with a preregistered 68-country survey of 71,922 respondents and found that in most countries, most people trust scientists and agree that scientists should engage more in society and policymaking. We found variations between and within countries, which we explain with individual- and country-level variables, including political orientation. While there is no widespread lack of trust in scientists, we cannot discount the concern that lack of trust in scientists by even a small minority may affect considerations of scientific evidence in policymaking. These findings have implications for scientists and policymakers seeking to maintain and increase trust in scientists.
A manifesto for a globally diverse, equitable, and inclusive open science
The field of psychology has rapidly transformed its open science practices in recent years. Yet there has been limited progress in integrating principles of diversity, equity and inclusion. In this Perspective, we raise the spectre of Questionable Generalisability Practices and the issue of MASKing (Making Assumptions based on Skewed Knowledge), calling for more responsible practices in generalising study findings and co-authorship to promote global equity in knowledge production. To drive change, researchers must target all four key components of the research process: design, reporting, generalisation, and evaluation. Additionally, macro-level geopolitical factors must be considered to move towards a robust behavioural science that is truly inclusive, representing the voices and experiences of the majority world (i.e., low-and-middle-income countries).
Responses