We describe the basic principles of mental health care during the COVID-19 pandemic that should be endorsed by the mental health professional associations and incorporated in the health strategies for the management of the COVID-19 pandemic. The main principle is that there should be no substantial differences in the provision of health care for COVID-19 between persons with pre-existing mental health disorders and the ones without previous disorders. Subsequently, the organization of the health care should reflect that as well. These principles should (a) prevent the possible effects of stigmatizing attitudes toward mental health issues, possibly leading to potentially deleterious situations, such as psychiatric patients being treated (even temporarily) separately from other patients, in psychiatric facilities, where the staff is not equipped and trained adequately for the management of COVID-19; (b) highlight the fact that patients with mental health disorders are at greater risk for developing serious complications of COVID-19 infection due to other factors—they often smoke and have comorbidities such as hypertension, diabetes, all associated with higher morbidity and mortality from COVID-19 infection; (c) highlight that measures should be taken to minimize the risk of the spread of infection in psychiatric wards/institutions; (d) provide a general framework for the reorganization of mental health services toward the provision of services for persons in need, including frontline medical workers and patients with COVID-19 without previous mental health problems as well as for persons with pre-existing mental health problems under new circumstances of pandemic.

Background: Burnout is a common mental problem in medical students. For those who are following medical studies abroad there is a higher risk of suffering this syndrome, due to the combination of academic stress and the stress derived from their new living situation. This study was performed with the purpose of testing the following hypothesis: in medical students enrolled in medical programs abroad, abilities associated with professionalism and family support play a protective role in the prevention of suffering burnout. Methods: A cross-sectional study was performed in the Faculty of Medicine of the University of Zagreb, where a fully English medical program is offered. The general version of the Maslach Burnout Inventory (MBI-GS) was used as a dependent variable, while Jefferson Scales of empathy, teamwork, and physician lifelong learning and the Social and Emotional Loneliness Scale for Adults were used as predictive variables. In addition, information related to sex, country of birth, native language, age, academic achievement, and living situation were collected in a socio-demographic form. Linear regression models were applied to identify predictors of burnout. Results: In a sample composed of 188 medical students (38 Croatians and 144 foreigners from 28 countries), 18% of the global score in the MBI-GS was explained by lifelong learning and family loneliness. A separate analysis for each domain of the MBI-GS allowed the creation of three models: the first model explained 19% of the variance of the “exhaustion” domain by “country of birth”, “living with parents”, “academic year”, and “cynicism”; a second model explained 24% of the variance of the “cynicism” domain by “academic year”, “empathy”, “lifelong learning”, and “exhaustion”; and finally, a third model explained 24% of the variance of the “professional efficacy” domain by “lifelong learning”, “family loneliness”, and “cynicism”. All obtained models presented an effect size between medium and large, as well as matching the required conditions for statistical inference. Conclusions: These findings confirm the important role that family plays as a source of support for medical students. Empathy and lifelong learning, two specific elements of medical professionalism, appear as protective factors in the prevention of burnout in international students.

Using internet search engines (such as Google search) in systematic literature reviews is increasingly becoming a ubiquitous part of search methodology. In order to integrate the vast quantity of available knowledge, literature mostly focuses on systematic reviews, considered to be principal sources of scientific evidence at all practical levels. Any possible individual methodological flaws present in these systematic reviews have the potential to become systemic. This particular bias, that could be referred to as (re)search bubble effect, is introduced because of inherent, personalized nature of internet search engines that tailors results according to derived user preferences based on unreproducible criteria. In other words, internet search engines adjust their user’s beliefs and attitudes, leading to the creation of a personalized (re)search bubble, including entries that have not been subjected to rigorous peer review process. The internet search engine algorithms are in a state of constant flux, producing differing results at any given moment, even if the query remains identical. There are many more subtle ways of introducing unwanted variations and synonyms of search queries that are used autonomously, detached from user insight and intent. Even the most well-known and respected systematic literature reviews do not seem immune to the negative implications of the search bubble effect, affecting reproducibility. Although immensely useful and justified by the need for encompassing the entirety of knowledge, the practice of including internet search engines in systematic literature reviews is fundamentally irreconcilable with recent emphasis on scientific reproducibility and rigor, having a profound impact on the discussion of the limits of scientific epistemology. Scientific research that is not reproducible, may still be called science, but represents one that should be avoided. Our recommendation is to use internet search engines as an additional literature source, primarily in order to validate initial search strategies centered on bibliographic databases.

Trust in healthcare systems and physicians is considered important for the delivery of good healthcare. A cross-sectional survey was conducted on a random three-stage sample of the general population of Croatia (N = 1230), stratified by regions. Of respondents, 58.7% displayed a high or very high level of trust in the healthcare system, 65.6% in physicians, and 78.3% in their family physician. Respondents’ views regarding patients’ roles in the discussion of treatment options, confidence in physicians’ expertise, and underlying motives of physicians were mixed. Respondents with a lower level of education, those with low monthly incomes, and those from smaller settlements had lower levels of trust in physicians and the healthcare system. Trust in other institutions, religiosity and religious beliefs, tolerance of personal choice, and experience of caring for the seriously ill and dying were predictors of trust in healthcare and physicians. Our findings suggest that levels of healthcare-related trust in Croatia are increasing in comparison with previous research, but need improvement. Levels of trust are lowest in populations that are most vulnerable and most in need of care and protection.

To explore physician-patient communication practices during the process of obtaining informed consent in a hospital setting in Croatia. Two hundred and fifty patients (response rate 78%) from five tertiary level hospitals in Zagreb, Croatia, anonymously filled in the questionnaire on informed consent and communication practices by Nemcekova et al in the period from April to December 2011. Eighty five percent of patients received complete, understandable information, presented in a considerate manner. Patients in surgical departments received a higher level of information than those in internal medicine departments. Patients were informed about health risks of the proposed treatments (in 74% of cases) and procedures (76%), health consequences of refusing a medical intervention (69%), and other methods of treatment (46%). However, patients pointed out a number of problems in physician-patient communication. Communication practices during informed consent-obtaining process in hospitals in Zagreb are based on a model of shared decision-making, but paternalistic physician-patient relationship is still present. Our results indicate that Croatia is undergoing a transition in the physician-patient relationship and communication.