Addressing the psychological mechanisms and structural inequalities that underpin mental health issues is critical to recovery following disasters and pandemics. The Asia Pacific Disaster Mental Health Network was established in June 2020 in response to the current disaster climate and to foster advancements in disaster-oriented mental health research, practice and policy across the region. Supported by the World Health Organization (WHO) Thematic Platform for Health Emergency and Disaster Risk Management (Health EDRM), the network brings together leading disaster psychiatry, psychology and public health experts. Our aim is to advance policy, research and targeted translation of the evidence so that communities are better informed in preparation and response to disasters, pandemics and mass trauma. The first meetings of the network resulted in the development of a regional disaster mental health agenda focused on the current context, with five priority areas: (1) Strengthening community engagement and the integration of diverse perspectives in planning, implementing and evaluating mental health and psychosocial response in disasters; (2) Supporting and assessing the capacity of mental health systems to respond to disasters; (3) Optimising emerging technologies in mental healthcare; (4) Understanding and responding appropriately to addressing the mental health impacts of climate change; (5) Prioritising mental health and psychosocial support for high-risk groups. Consideration of these priority areas in future research, practice and policy will support nuanced and effective psychosocial initiatives for disaster-affected populations within the Asia Pacific region.

Objectives: Understanding how to help people form habits is important in improving health interventions. The impact of two behaviour change techniques on behaviour (cues and monitoring) was tested, and the role of psychosocial factors that may predict behaviour change and habit formation were investigated. Methods: Participants (N = 186) were randomised to one of six conditions (behaviour monitoring vs habit monitoring vs irrelevant behaviour monitoring and cued vs not cued) and instructed to engage in a specific, novel behaviour every day for the following 3 weeks. Participants completed measures of behaviour, habit strength, prospective memory, attitude, intention, self-efficacy and motivation at three time points (pre-, post- and one-week follow-up). Results: All participants increased habit strength and behaviour. Post-hoc, it was found that community members, compared to students, developed stronger habits and maintained the behaviour and habit strength at one-week follow-up. Intention, behaviour and habit strength post-intervention moderated behaviour and habit strength maintenance. Conclusion: This research furthers our understanding of how to help people form healthy habits. It was found that any intervention seems to be effective in forming a habit and changing behaviour. Moreover, intention, habit and behaviour were the most important predictors of behaviour change and habit formation maintenance.

Healthy eating behaviours are important for physical and mental well-being and developing healthy eating behaviours early in life is important. As parents are the main providers of preschool children's food the main objective of this study was to use the theory of planned behaviour, expanded to include habit and past behaviour, to predict parents' healthy feeding intention and behaviour. Theory of planned behaviour, habit strength, and past behaviour were reported at baseline by 443 mothers. One week later, 235 mothers completed a healthy feeding questionnaire on the eating behaviours of their 2-4 year old child. Data were analysed using hierarchical regression analyses to predict parent's general healthy feeding behaviour, and five sub-behaviours: parents' perceptions of their child's fruit and vegetable consumption, healthy and unhealthy snacking behaviour, as well as healthy and unhealthy drinking behaviour. Intention, perceived behavioural control, habit strength and past behaviour were all positively associated with parents' general healthy feeding (47% explained variance). Perceived behavioural control was the only variable positively associated with mothers' perception of their child's fruit and vegetable consumption and unhealthy snacking behaviour. The theory did not explain the other behaviours. Moreover, habit strength only strengthened the intention-behaviour link for fruit and vegetable consumption and child's age was only positively associated with the mothers' perception of their child's unhealthy snacking behaviour. The findings suggest important differences in the predictors of different feeding behaviours that can provide direction for future intervention development.

Background: Evidence-based smoking cessation interventions provided by healthcare professionals can be successful in helping citizens to quit smoking. Yet, evidence is needed about the active ingredients of these interventions, how these ingredients work and how they are implemented in practice. Such knowledge is required to effectively support healthcare professionals to optimally put evidence-based smoking cessation interventions to (inter)national practice. Objective: To identify active ingredients (including behavior change techniques), mechanisms of action and implementation fidelity reported in smoking cessation interventions in Dutch primary care settings and to relate these to intervention effectiveness. Methods: A systematic review was conducted by searching nine national intervention or funding databases, five international scientific databases and consulting 17 national smoking cessation experts. Out of 1066 identified manuscripts, 40 interventions were eligible for this review. Based on published protocols, information regarding behavior change techniques and mechanisms of action was systematically abstracted. Additionally, information regarding study characteristics and other active ingredients, effects on smoking behavior and implementation fidelity was abstracted. Comparative effectiveness concerning abstracted intervention characteristics was qualitatively explored. Results: Active ingredients, mechanisms of action and implementation fidelity were moderately to poorly reported. Interventions applying behavior change techniques and interventions with a single behavioral target (i.e. smoking-only versus multiple behaviors) seemed to provide stronger evidence for successfully changing smoking behavior. Conclusion: Attention to and reporting on interventions’ active ingredients (e.g. behavior change techniques), mechanisms of action and implementation fidelity are prerequisites for developing more effective evidence-based smoking cessation interventions to be successfully implemented in primary healthcare. Implications: This systematic review provides an overview of smoking cessation interventions in Dutch primary care settings, identified since the year 2000. Smoking cessation support is offered in various forms, but our qualitative findings show that interventions including more behavior change techniques and interventions targeting only smoking cessation (compared to multiple behaviors) might be more effective. Results also show that—based on available intervention reports—it is difficult to distinguish patterns of active ingredients (such as behavior change techniques), mechanisms of action and fidelity of implementation in relation to interventions’ effectiveness. This means (quality of) reporting on these intervention characteristics should improve.