Objective: Fear of COVID-19 was associated with more severe depressive and anxiety symptoms. This study aimed to explore COVID-19-related fear, depressive and anxiety symptoms, social responsibility, and behavioral responses during the COVID-19 pandemic in Greece. Method: A cross-sectional study was conducted from April 10 to April 13, 2020. Members of the Greek general population completed anonymously an online survey, distributed through the social media. Among the 3,700 adult respondents, 3,029 fulfilled inclusion criteria. The survey included sociodemographic questions, questions exploring potential risk factors for increased fear of COVID-19, questions about the employment of safety and checking behaviors, and questions about compliance with public health guidelines. In addition, four psychometric scales were used, the Fear of COVID-19 Scale (FCV-19S), the Brief Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) depression scale, the Generalized Anxiety Disorder scale (GAD-7), and Steele’s Social Responsibility Motivation scale. Multivariate General Linear Models (GLM) were used to depict significant differences among dependent variables (FCV-19S, PHQ-9, GAD-7) and independent variables (potential risk factors, safety and checking behaviors, compliance with guidelines). The relationship between the FCV-19S total score and influencing factors was quantified by linear regression analysis. Results: Several participants reported high levels of COVID-19-related fear (35.7%) and moderate to severe depressive symptoms (22.8%), while a significant proportion reported moderate to severe anxiety symptoms (77.4%). Women scored altogether significantly higher than men. Respondents under the age of 30 reported less fear and depressive symptoms and showed the least social responsibility. Based on GLM, a significant other’s COVID-19 illness, being on psychiatric medication, employment of safety and checking behaviors, and compliance with guidelines were associated with higher COVID-19-related fear. Linear regression analysis revealed that gender, age, depressive, and anxiety symptoms modified levels of COVID-19-related fear. Conclusions: Greater behavioral responses to the pandemic, that is, excessive employment of safety/checking behaviors and greater compliance with guidelines, were shown to amplify fear, potentially due to increased contamination awareness. In addition, female gender, older age, and more severe anxiety symptoms were related with higher COVID-19-related fear. Describing and weighing carefully the psychosocial and behavioral impact of the pandemic will enable the implementation of both supportive and preventive interventions.

The COVID-19 pandemic elicited fear. The Fear of COVID-19 Scale (FCV-19S) is a newly developed self-reported measure, originally developed in Persian to assess COVID-19-related fear. To date, the scale has been translated and validated in 19 other languages, among which Greek. This study, conducted through an online survey, aimed to further explore the validity of the Greek FCV-19S version, as well as to identify appropriate cutoff scores. A total of 538 respondents completed the sociodemographic data sheet, the Generalized Anxiety Disorder 7-item scale, the Short Health Anxiety Inventory, and the Posttraumatic Stress Disorder-8 inventory. According to the results, a cutoff point score of 16.5 or higher revealed a significant predictive power for anxiety, health anxiety, and posttraumatic stress symptoms. Altogether, although the cutoff scores of the Greek FCV-19S version were explored to further evaluate the scale’s validity, they may facilitate discrimination of adults with extreme COVID-19-related fear from those with normal fear reactions.

The manifestation of Specific Learning Disorder (SLD) during adulthood is one of the least examined research areas among the relevant literature. Therefore, the adult population with SLD is considered a “rare” and “unique” population of major scientific interest. The aim of the current study was to investigate, describe, and analyze the clinical, academic, and socio-demographic characteristics, and other everyday functioning life-skills of adults with SLD, in an attempt to shed more light on this limited field of research. The overall sample consisted of 318 adults, who were assessed for possible SLD. The diagnostic procedure included self-report records (clinical interview), psychometric/cognitive, and learning assessments. The main finding of the study was that SLD, even during adulthood, continues to affect the individuals’ well-being and functionality in all of their life domains. There is an ongoing struggle of this population to obtain academic qualifications in order to gain vocational rehabilitation, as well as a difficulty to create a family, possibly resulting from their unstable occupational status, their financial insecurity, and the emotional/self-esteem issues they usually encounter, due to their ongoing learning problems. Moreover, the various interpersonal characteristics, the comorbidity issues, and the different developmental backgrounds observed in the clinical, academic, personal, social, and occupational profiles of the participants, highlight the enormous heterogeneity and the continuum that characterizes SLD during adulthood. We conclude that there is an imperative need for further research and the construction of more sufficient tools for the assessment and diagnosis of SLD during adulthood, which will take into account the developmental challenges and milestones in a series of domains, in order to assist this “vulnerable” population with their life struggles.

Introduction: Numerous studies reveal that mental health-related stigma, stereotypes, and prejudices negatively affect the patients, jeopardizing their health, prognosis, and social opportunities. Healthcare professionals, who are in the first line of combating mental disease, are expected to play a significant role in drastically changing discriminatory and stigmatizing attitudes toward psychiatric patients and in diminishing the existing healthcare and social disparities. In this study, we aimed to explore and highlight the views of Greek medical students—that is of the future physicians—toward mental illness and people suffering from it.Materials and methods: It is a cross-sectional, observational study, in which 324 undergraduate students from the most populous Greek medical school of the Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, participated online, during the spring semester of 2022. The tools used were the Opinions about Mental Illness Scale (OMI) that assesses one’s viewpoints about mental illness, the Social Distance Scale (SDS) that captures the desired degree of social distancing from patients with mental disorders, and the Level of Contact Report (LCR-12) that estimates the level of familiarity with them.Results: Participants displayed rather positive attitudes regarding the etiology of mental illness, social integration, and discrimination toward psychiatric patients [as evaluated with the respective OMI subscales; Etiology mean score (μ):8.87 ± 4.68, Social Integration (μ):17.79 ± 5.42, Social Discrimination (μ):13.54 ± 11.17], and more clearly favorable opinions concerning the need for social provision or the enactment of restrictive measures [as expressed with the relative OMI subscales; Social Care (μ):22.74 ± 4.56, Social Restriction (μ):13.27 ± 8.98], while claiming to be quite familiar with mental disorders and individuals experiencing them (as assessed with LCR; μ: 8.71 ± 2.16), and relatively willing to interact with them (as measured with SDS; μ:8.95 ± 4.23). Degree of familiarity with mental illness was directly proportional to the desire for contact with patients living with it, while the higher both were, the more improved most of the aforementioned OMI sectors were found to be. Female sex, clinical medical education, previous clinical psychiatric training, and living with or being a person with a mental disorder were the factors that defined a statistically refined profile in many of the aspects above.Conclusion: Our findings are in accordance with many prior and recent studies, while showing improved opinions compared to those of previous research in Greek student and healthcare population. They are calling for vigilance, rather than complacency, as well as educational and social interventions, in order to enable current and future healthcare professionals to perform their function to its fullest extent. Implications of our results and further research suggestions are included.

Background: A considerable endeavor had taken place in order to understand the associated challenges for children and adolescents with Specific Learning Disorder (SLD) and Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus (T1DM) but also in order to describe the necessary skills and approaches that the care givers have to develop to assist both children and parents. (1) Aim: The aim of this review is twofold. Firstly, to highlight the T1DM’s potential impact on psychological well-being, on cognitive functioning and on school performance in children and adolescents who confront SLD. Secondly, to discuss the necessity of a multidiscipline approach of poor school performance in students with SLD and T1DM, presenting the serious contribution of care providers: (a) parents/carers in the family setting, (b) teachers and psychologists in the school setting and (c) health specialists (pediatricians, nutricians, nurses, child psychiatrists and psychologists) in the medical setting. (2) Methods: In this narrative literature review of 12 selected articles, each one studies a special aspect of approach, during the diagnosis and the treatment of individuals with T1DM and SLD. The review concerns the arising problems and difficulties in the adherence to diagnosis, the management of insulin, the mental and physical wellbeing, the school performance, the cognitive functioning and learning difficulties of patients. We tried to synthesize an interdisciplinary approach that involves collaboration between family, school and medical frame; facilitating children’s and adolescents’ difficulties management, as well as parent and teacher involvement during the intervention implementation. (3) Results: The main issues of concern were examined through the available literature, as different factors had to be re-examined in the previous studies, regarding the potential impact of T1DM in cognitive and psychological functioning, as well as the effects of the intervention/approach/treatment of children and adolescents with SLD and T1DM. (4) Conclusions: Although T1DM diagnosis and demanding treatment are a heavy burden for children and their families, T1DM may or may not be associated with a variety of academic and psychological outcomes. Despite the variability of the reviewed research design quality, it was clearly defined that the impact of T1DM is not uniform across educational and mental variables. Strengthening the children’s physical, psychological and social wellbeing is an especially important factor, as it facilitates the insulin’s management as well as the learning difficulties. This is possible by supporting the parental and teacher involvement in the intervention process. This review highlights the need to reduce the distance between theory/research and practice, in some of the proposed areas in this field of knowledge.

SLI and SLD constitute two independent neurodevelopmental disorders, which frequently cause challenges in the diagnosis process, especially due to their nature. This has caused disagreement among clinicians regarding their recognition as separate or overlapping disorders. The objective of the study was to enlighten the path of valid diagnosis and intervention during adolescence when the two disorders change their manifestation and overlap. Two hundred Greek adolescents (140 boys and 60 girls), 124 already diagnosed with SLD and 76 diagnosed with SLI, 12–16 years old, participated in the study. All participants were assessed in reading, oral and written language and mathematics (mathematical operations and mathematical reasoning) along with IQ testing. In order to determine statistically significant differences, the chi-square test, independent samples t-test, odds ratios and their 95 per cent confidence intervals were implemented. The results revealed that the SLI group presented significantly greater difficulties than SLD in their overall cognitive-mental profile and in most language and mathematical measurements (number concept, executive-procedural part of solving operations and mathematical reasoning). The similarity of the two groups was mainly detected in their deficient metacognitive, metalinguistic and metamnemonic strategies. The research concludes that SLD adolescents managed to overcome their difficulties to a significant degree, while adolescents with SLI still struggle with many learning areas.