Latest news with #MatthewHobbs
RNZ News
17-07-2025
- Health
- RNZ News
Is our mental health determined by where we live?
By Matthew Hobbs Chris G. Sibley Elena Moltchanova Taciano L. Milfont of Where we live and how many times we move is directly linked to our mental health, research shows. Photo: RNZ / REECE BAKER Ever felt like where you live is having an impact on your mental health? Turns out, you're not imagining things. Our new analysis of eight years of data from the New Zealand Attitude and Values Study found how often we move and where we live are intertwined with our mental health. In some respects, this finding might seem obvious. Does a person feel the same living in a walkable and leafy suburb with parks and stable neighbours as they would in a more transient neighbourhood with few local services and busy highways? Probably not. The built and natural environment shapes how safe, supported and settled a person feels. We wanted to know to what extent a person's mental health is shaped by where they live - and to what degree a person's mental health determines where they end up living. Most research on the environmental influences on mental health gives us a snapshot of people's lives at a single point in time. That's useful, but it doesn't show how things change over time or how the past may affect the future. Our study took a slightly different approach. By tracking the same people year after year, we looked at patterns over time: how their mental health shifted, whether they moved house, their access to positive and negative environmental features, and how the areas they lived in changed when it came to factors such as poverty, unemployment and overcrowding. We also looked at things like age, body size and how much people exercised, all of which can influence mental health, too. To make sense of such complex and interconnected data, we turned to modern machine learning tools - in particular Random Forest algorithms . These tools allowed us to build a lot of individual models (trees) looking at how various factors affect mental health. We could then see which factors come up most often to evaluate both their relative importance and the likely extent of their influence. We also ran Monte Carlo simulations . Think of these like a high-tech crystal ball, to explore what might happen to mental health over time if neighbourhood conditions improved. These simulations produced multiple future scenarios with better neighbourhood conditions, used Random Forest to forecast mental health outcomes in each, and then averaged the results. What we uncovered was a potential negative feedback loop. People who had depression or anxiety were more likely to move house, and those who moved were, on average, more likely to experience worsening mental health later on. And there's more. People with persistent mental health issues weren't just moving more often, they were also more likely to move into a more deprived area. In other words, poorer mental health was related to a higher likelihood of ending up in places where resources were scarcer and the risk of ongoing stress was potentially higher. Our study was unable to say why the moves occurred, but it may be that mental health challenges were related to unstable housing, financial strain, or the need for a fresh start. Our future research will try to unpick some of this. On the flip side, people who didn't relocate as often, especially those in lower-deprivation areas, tended to have better long-term mental health. So, stability matters. So does the neighbourhood. These findings challenge the idea that mental health is just about what's inside us. Where we live plays a key role in shaping how we feel. But it's not just that our environment affects our minds. Our minds can also steer us into different environments, too. Our study shows that mental health and place are potentially locked in a feedback loop. One influences the other and the cycle can either support wellbeing or drive decline. That has real implications for how we support people with mental health challenges. In this study, if a person was already struggling, they were more likely to move and more likely to end up somewhere that made life harder. This isn't just about individual choice. It's about the systems we've built, housing markets, income inequality, access to care and more. If we want better mental health at a population level, we need to think beyond the individual level. We need to think about place. Because in the end, mental health doesn't just live in the mind; it's also rooted in the places we live. * This story was originally published on The Conversation .
The Guardian
24-03-2025
- Health
- The Guardian
Prostate cancer surgery breakthrough offers hope for erectile function
A more precise form of prostate cancer surgery nearly doubles the chances of men retaining erectile function afterwards compared with standard surgery, according to the first comprehensive trial of the procedure. Doctors in five UK hospitals assessed the surgical approach that aims to preserve crucial nerves that run through the outer layer of the prostate and are thought to be responsible for producing erections. Known as NeuroSafe, the procedure involves checking prostate tissue removed from the patient while the operation is under way. If the examination suggests the tumour has been removed, the nerve-containing outer layer of the prostate can be left intact, reducing the patient's risk of erectile problems. Prof Greg Shaw, the trial lead and a consultant urologist at University College London hospitals NHS foundation trust, said: 'This procedure gives surgeons feedback during the surgery to give them the certainty they need to spare as many nerves as possible and give men increased hope of recovering their sexual potency after their cancer is surgically removed.' Prostate cancer is the most common form of cancer in men in England, with 50,000 cases diagnosed each year. Worldwide, nearly 1.5 million men are diagnosed and 375,000 die annually. The disease is most common in over-50s and is often called a silent killer because it causes no symptoms in the early stages. Recent developments in robotic surgery have allowed doctors to perform precision 'nerve-sparing' operations in prostate cancer patients. This involves removing the diseased prostate while leaving the outer layers and the nerves running through them. However, doctors must be sure that no cancer cells are left behind, and this can be difficult to assess. If the cancer is advanced, surgeons will err on the side of caution and remove the prostate with its outer layers to reduce the risk of missing any tumour cells and the disease returning. In the NeuroSafe procedure, doctors remove the prostate while preserving as much nerve tissue around it as possible. Slices of the prostate are then frozen, stained and examined for cancer cells. If the tumour reaches the surface of the prostate, the outer layers and its nerves may need to be removed. But if the tumour stops short, the surgery is considered complete. The trial assessed 344 men with prostate cancer who had no history of erectile dysfunction. Half received the NeuroSafe procedure and half underwent standard surgery. A year later, 56% of men who had standard surgery reported severe erectile dysfunction, compared with 38% who had NeuroSafe surgery. Less than a quarter (23%) who had standard surgery reported no or only mild erectile dysfunction, compared with 39% who had the NeuroSafe procedure. Details were presented at the 2025 European Association of Urology congress in Madrid and are published in the Lancet Oncology. Dr Matthew Hobbs, the director of research at Prostate Cancer UK, said: 'Prostate cancer surgery is a life-saving option for lots of men, but it's a major procedure that can cause side-effects like erection problems. A major challenge we face is how to cure men but also ensure they can live life to the full afterwards. 'This study is promising and provides evidence that innovative types of surgery can reduce erectile dysfunction in some men. However, more research is needed to prove whether NeuroSafe is as effective as traditional techniques at delivering a complete cure. 'We also need to understand exactly which men could benefit from this new technique and, crucially, whether this technique could be delivered at scale across the NHS to make it accessible to men across the UK.'
