Dinesh Bhugra’s research while affiliated with Imperial College London and other places

The Israel–Gaza conflict traces back to the 1948 Arab-Israeli War, which left Gaza under Egyptian control and home to many Palestinian refugees. In 1967, Israel captured Gaza during the Six-Day War, initiating decades of occupation. The Oslo Accords of the 1990s granted limited Palestinian self-governance, but tensions escalated after Hamas took control of Gaza in 2007, leading to Israeli blockades and recurring cycles of violence. Recent attacks stem from longstanding grievances, including Gaza’s blockade, disputes over Jerusalem, and Israeli settlements in the West Bank, coupled with Hamas’ militant actions and Israel’s retaliatory strikes. These events highlight unresolved territorial, political, and humanitarian issues fueling the conflict.

The body is a cultural vessel, giving voice to the unspoken words of the soul and transforming the nuances of distress into a script of symptoms that echoes across diverse cultural landscapes. Within the intricate tapestry of human experience, certain threads stand out, weaving a story that defies boundaries and spans the globe. Somatization Across Cultures unfurls these threads, illuminating the diverse landscape of somatization disorders and their interplay with culture, identity, and healing practices. As you embark on this literary voyage, prepare to traverse continents and minds, exploring the profound connection between the physical and the psychological, the cultural and the clinical. Part of the Oxford Cultural Psychiatry series, this volume brings together the various somatization syndromes: their description, presentation, assessment, and management in one place. It is a fascinating read for any psychiatrist, physician, clinical psychologist, public health specialist, nurse and other healthcare professional, as well as any sociologist, anthropologist, and policymaker, and anyone else interested in this area of psychiatry.

As a professional duty, physicians are often required to publicly comment on health-related topics. However, ethical complexities can arise during discussions about high-profile individuals or events, especially in an era of rapid news cycles and digital media. The American Medical Association (AMA) has policies concerning physician commentary and media interactions, as does the American Psychiatric Association (i.e., the Goldwater Rule). Nevertheless, the extent to which other United States medical associations have adopted similar protocols remains underexplored. Focusing on non-psychiatric members of the AMA’s policymaking body, the Federation of Medicine (FMMs), this study sought to analyze cross-speciality perspectives. Between January-March 2024, online resources for N = 122 FMMs were reviewed (e.g., professional codes and position statements), followed by email outreach to verify positions and garner further insights. n = 47 FMMs provided sufficient information for inclusion, cumulatively representing approximately 950,000 members. n = 16 FMMs (34%) had guidelines or policies regarding public commentary, generally emphasizing accuracy, consent, and confidentiality. Yet, for the majority of FMMs (n = 31/66%), no specific regulations were identified; these organizations did not cite any proprietary statutes or deferred to AMA materials. Moreover, existing FMM policies largely overlooked the impact of Artificial Intelligence and digital misinformation, warranting cross-specialty exchanges to uphold credible discourse amid societal and technological shifts. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1038/s41598-024-81176-6.

Background The shortage of physicians in Turkey is a highly critical emergency. In fact, physicians’ migration to developing or high-income countries, defined as brain drain, threatens the sustainability of the national healthcare system. Aims This study explored the driving factors associated with Turkish Physicians’ brain drain, including high-economic inflation, social-politics, poor-living, equity, violence, and the desire to practice medical activity abroad. Methods A cross-sectional survey of 1,861 Turkish physicians aged 25 to 65 years old was conducted employing the Brain Drain questionnaire, the Depression Anxiety Stress Scale (DASS-21), the Patient Health Questionnaire 9 (PHQ-9), and the Fatigue Assessment Scale (FAS). Results Significant differences were observed among physicians staying in Turkey versus considering migration to Western countries, regarding their age, gender, marital status, educational level, occupational status, work years, hospital night shifts, income, and cigarette/nargileh smoking habits ( all p ⩽ .018). The main reasons for brain drain included transport problems, harassment, low salary, malpractice, bad environment, job insecurity, workload, burnout, treating difficult patients, inadequate postgraduate systems, peer-pressure, health safety concerns, and favoritism in the workplace, as well as stress and depression caused by work overload. In fact, depression, anxiety, stress, fatigue, and burnout varied significantly among the different groups of physicians (all p ⩽ .013). Additionally, key predictors of brain drain were better job opportunities, poor hospital management (in Turkey), job-related stress, dealing with difficult patients, research deficiencies, workload, burnout, transportation issues, short consultation time, low salary, and fatigue. Among the general factors contributing to the brain drain in the Turkish Health System, we identified significant issues related to research deficiencies, compulsory working duties, poor quality of postgraduate, inadequate medical-schools, poor hospital management, and shortage of consultants. Conclusion Physicians’ migration is a major global public health concern, leading to substantial risks for healthcare services, especially in Turkey. Many physicians decide to migrate to work in Western countries.

The term social justice has become frequently used in recent times, becoming what might be defined as a buzz word but it is often misunderstood and misused in mental health and therapeutic settings. This ground-breaking book (as briefly detailed in this chapter) is a comprehensive text which we hope will help define what the ‘social justice agenda’ in therapeutic fields and mental health is. It contains concrete and innovative descriptions of social justice in practice. It clearly illustrates the principles of social justice as integral to the practice of psychiatry, psychology, psychotherapy, mental health, social work, and related disciplines which all come in many guises. It provides detailed discussions of theoretical perspectives, as well as case studies and examples of real-life practice. Authors are from different branches of applied psychology, medicine, psychiatry, psychotherapy, research and service user/ expert by experience backgrounds and come from a range of countries.