scispace - formally typeset
Open accessJournal ArticleDOI: 10.1017/S0033291721000933

Investigating the effect of national government physical distancing measures on depression and anxiety during the COVID-19 pandemic through meta-analysis and meta-regression.

02 Mar 2021-Psychological Medicine (Cambridge University Press (CUP))-Vol. 51, Iss: 6, pp 881-893
Abstract: BACKGROUND: COVID-19 physical distancing measures can potentially increase the likelihood of mental disorders. It is unknown whether these measures are associated with depression and anxiety. OBJECTIVES: To investigate meta-analytic global levels of depression and anxiety during the COVID-19 pandemic and how the implementation of mitigation strategies (i.e. public transportation closures, stay-at-home orders, etc.) impacted such disorders. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, MEDLINE, Web of Science, BIOSIS Citation Index, Current Content Connect, PsycINFO, CINAHL, medRxiv, and PsyArXiv databases for depression and anxiety prevalences; Oxford Covid-19 Government Response Tracker for the containment and closure policies indexes; Global Burden of Disease Study for previous levels of depression and anxiety. STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Original studies conducted during COVID-19 pandemic, which assessed categorical depression and anxiety, using PHQ-9 and GAD-7 scales (cutoff ⩾10). PARTICIPANTS AND INTERVENTIONS: General population, healthcare providers, students, and patients. National physical distancing measures. STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS METHODS: Meta-analysis and meta-regression. RESULTS: In total, 226 638 individuals were assessed within the 60 included studies. Global prevalence of both depression and anxiety during the COVID-19 pandemic was 24.0% and 21.3%, respectively. There were differences in the prevalence of both anxiety and depression reported across regions and countries. Asia (17.6% and 17.9%), and China (16.2% and 15.5%) especially, had the lowest prevalence of both disorders. Regarding the impact of mitigation strategies on mental health, only public transportation closures increased the prevalence of anxiety, especially in Europe. LIMITATIONS: Country-level data on physical distancing measures and previous anxiety/depression may not necessarily reflect local (i.e. city-specific) contexts. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS OF KEY FINDINGS: Mental health concerns should not be viewed only as a delayed consequence of the COVID-19 pandemic, but also as a concurrent epidemic. Our data provide support for policy-makers to consider real-time enhanced mental health services, and increase initiatives to foster positive mental health outcomes.

... read more

Topics: Anxiety (63%), Psychological intervention (57%), Mental health (56%) ... read more
Citations
  More

11 results found


Open accessJournal ArticleDOI: 10.1016/J.PNPBP.2021.110341
Abstract: Background It remains unclear whether COVID-19 is associated with psychiatric symptoms during or after the acute illness phase. Being affected by the disease exposes the individual to an uncertain prognosis and a state of quarantine. These factors can predispose individuals to the development of mental symptoms during or after the acute phase of the disease. There is a need for prospective studies assessing psychiatric symptoms in COVID-19 patients in the post-infection period. Methods In this prospective cohort study, nasopharyngeal swabs for COVID-19 tests were collected at patients' homes under the supervision of trained healthcare personnel. Patients who tested positive for COVID-19 and were classified as mild cases (N = 895) at treatment intake were further assessed for the presence of psychiatric symptoms (on average, 56.6 days after the intake). We investigated the association between the number of COVID-19 symptoms at intake and depressive, anxiety and post-traumatic symptoms approximately two months later, adjusting for previous mental health status, time between baseline and outcome, and other confounders. Multivariate logistic regression and generalized linear models were employed for categorical and continuous outcomes, respectively. Results A clinically significant level of depressive, anxiety and post-traumatic stress symptoms were reported by 26.2% (N = 235), 22.4% (N = 201), and 17.3% (N = 155) of the sample. Reporting an increased number of COVID-related symptoms was associated with the presence of clinically significant levels of depressive (aOR = 1.059;95%CI = 1.002–1.119), anxiety (aOR = 1.072;95%CI = 1.012–1.134), and post-traumatic stress (aOR = 1.092;95%CI = 1.024–1.166) symptoms. Sensitivity analyses supported findings for both continuous and categorical measures. Conclusion Exposure to an increased number of COVID-19 symptoms may be associated with depressive, anxiety and post-traumatic symptoms after the acute phase of the disease. These patients should be monitored for the development of psychiatric symptoms after COVID-19 treatment discharge. Early interventions, such as brief interventions of psychoeducation on coping strategies, could benefit these individuals.

... read more

Topics: Anxiety (58%), Traumatic stress (53%), Psychoeducation (53%) ... read more

6 Citations


Open accessJournal ArticleDOI: 10.3390/IJERPH18157925
Abstract: An online survey was conducted to identify factors associated with financial insecurity, food insecurity and poor quality of daily lives of adults in Nigeria during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. The associations between the outcome (experience of financial loss, changes in food intake and impact of the pandemic on daily lives) and the explanatory (age, sex, education level, anxiety, depression, HIV status) variables were determined using logistic regression analysis. Of the 4439 respondents, 2487 (56.0%) were financially insecure, 907 (20.4%) decreased food intake and 4029 (90.8%) had their daily life negatively impacted. Males (AOR:0.84), people who felt depressed (AOR:0.62) and people living with HIV -PLHIV- (AOR:0.70) had significantly lower odds of financial insecurity. Older respondents (AOR:1.01) had significantly higher odds of financial insecurity. Those depressed (AOR:0.62) and PLHIV (AOR:0.55) had significantly lower odds of reporting decreased food intake. Respondents who felt anxious (AOR:0.07), depressed (AOR: 0.48) and who were PLHIV (AOR:0.68) had significantly lower odds of reporting a negative impact of the pandemic on their daily lives. We concluded the study findings may reflect a complex relationship between financial insecurity, food insecurity, poor quality of life, mental health, and socioeconomic status of adults living in Nigeria during the COVID-19 pandemic.

... read more

3 Citations


Open accessJournal ArticleDOI: 10.33448/RSD-V10I9.18307
Abstract: Aim: To demonstrate statistics related to the impacts of the pandemic on students' mental health. Methods: This is an integrative review carried out in July 2021, on LILACS, SciELO and Pubmed platforms via MEDLINE. Articles published in 2020 and 2021 were selected, in Portuguese, English, Spanish, French, and excluded theses, dissertations, editorial, letter to the editor, opinions and literature reviews. Results: It was found 202 articles and after the appraisal it was selected 10 articles, it was possible to evidence the increase of negative psychological manifestations in higher education students during the COVID-19 pandemic. Final considerations: It was found that most higher education students may report mental illnesses that may be related to the lack of social interaction in the face of social distance. Given the above, this study sought to contribute to data recognition and to soon serve health organizations with measures and solutions to reduce cases of university students with mental problems.

... read more

Topics: Mental health (55%), Social distance (51%), MEDLINE (50%)

2 Citations


Open accessJournal ArticleDOI: 10.3390/IJERPH18084312
Abstract: Concerns related to the first outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic in the Norwegian population are studied in a cross-sectional web-survey conducted between 8 April and 20 May 2020. The qualitative thematic analysis of the open-ended question "Do you have other concerns related to the pandemic?", followed a six-step process. Concerns from 1491 informants were analyzed, 34% of women and 30% of men (p = 0.05) provided concerns. Respondents with higher educational level reported concerns more often (86% vs. 83%, p = 0.022). The qualitative analysis revealed five themes-society, health, social activities, personal economy and duration-and 13 sub-themes, mostly related to the themes "society" and "health" (724 and 704, respectively). Empathy for others was prominent, for society (nationally and globally), but also concerns related to infecting others and family members at risk for developing serious illness if infected. The responses to the open-ended question yielded additional information, beyond the information obtained from questions with pre-categorized response options, especially related to concerns about society and health. Themes arising from the qualitative analysis shed light on what are important concerns for people during the pandemic and this may serve as targeted measures for the authorities.

... read more

Topics: Thematic analysis (55%), Population (51%)

1 Citations


Open accessJournal ArticleDOI: 10.25040/NTSH2021.01.15
Oleksandr Filts1, Oleh S. Fitkalo1, Oksana Lyzak1, Oleh Berezyuk1  +3 moreInstitutions (2)
10 Jun 2021-
Abstract: As the COVID-19 pandemic progresses, the observed increase in mental health issues requires more and more clinical attention. Mental disorders have become a major cause for disturbances in social adjustment, primarily due to disorders that fall into three clusters: Prolonged fatigue (asthenia) with cognitive impairment;anxiety disorders with sleep disorders;and depression. The last two are also found in individuals who have not contracted SARSCoV- 2;they are seen as a result of their exposure to the stress of the pandemic. Therefore, to successfully manage the consequences of the pandemic, it is necessary to develop a cohesive clinical interpretation of mental disorders related to COVID-19 infection. Our proposed model would encompass all the above manifestations as follows: A) for the general population - by the triad of 'nosogenic reactions' with excessive (hyper-), normal (normo-) or ignoring (hyponosognostic) psychological responses to stress related to the semantics and individual signifi cance of the SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis (nosos);b) for long COVID - by the biopsychosocial model as a typical combination of neurotoxic asthenia with cognitive impairment (Bonhoeff er's neurobiological factor) that exacerbates 'nosogenic' anxiety and sleep disorders (psychological factor) and thus provokes a depressive response (as a social maladaptive factor). © Oleksandr Filts, Oleh Fitkalo, Oksana Lyzak, Oleh Berezyuk, Olha Myshakivska, Lyudmyla Samsonova, Alfred Pritz, 2021.

... read more

Topics: Anxiety (55%), Mental health (53%), Biopsychosocial model (52%) ... read more

1 Citations


References
  More

99 results found


Open accessJournal ArticleDOI: 10.1371/JOURNAL.PMED.1000097
David Moher1, David Moher2, Alessandro Liberati3, Jennifer Tetzlaff2  +1 moreInstitutions (4)
21 Jul 2009-PLOS Medicine
Abstract: David Moher and colleagues introduce PRISMA, an update of the QUOROM guidelines for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses

... read more

Topics: Systematic review (53%)

53,418 Citations


Open accessJournal Article
David Moher1, David Moher2, Alessandro Liberati3, Jennifer Tetzlaff1  +1 moreInstitutions (4)
21 Jul 2009-Open Medicine
Abstract: Systematic reviews and meta-analyses have become increasingly important in health care. Clinicians read them to keep up to date with their field,1,2 and they are often used as a starting point for developing clinical practice guidelines. Granting agencies may require a systematic review to ensure there is justification for further research,3 and some health care journals are moving in this direction.4 As with all research, the value of a systematic review depends on what was done, what was found, and the clarity of reporting. As with other publications, the reporting quality of systematic reviews varies, limiting readers' ability to assess the strengths and weaknesses of those reviews. Several early studies evaluated the quality of review reports. In 1987, Mulrow examined 50 review articles published in 4 leading medical journals in 1985 and 1986 and found that none met all 8 explicit scientific criteria, such as a quality assessment of included studies.5 In 1987, Sacks and colleagues6 evaluated the adequacy of reporting of 83 meta-analyses on 23 characteristics in 6 domains. Reporting was generally poor; between 1 and 14 characteristics were adequately reported (mean = 7.7; standard deviation = 2.7). A 1996 update of this study found little improvement.7 In 1996, to address the suboptimal reporting of meta-analyses, an international group developed a guidance called the QUOROM Statement (QUality Of Reporting Of Meta-analyses), which focused on the reporting of meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials.8 In this article, we summarize a revision of these guidelines, renamed PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses), which have been updated to address several conceptual and practical advances in the science of systematic reviews (Box 1). Box 1 Conceptual issues in the evolution from QUOROM to PRISMA

... read more

Topics: Systematic review (63%), Centre for Reviews and Dissemination (52%), Meta-analysis (51%) ... read more

42,533 Citations


Open accessJournal ArticleDOI: 10.1046/J.1525-1497.2001.016009606.X
Abstract: OBJECTIVE: While considerable attention has focused on improving the detection of depression, assessment of severity is also important in guiding treatment decisions. Therefore, we examined the validity of a brief, new measure of depression severity.

... read more

Topics: Criterion validity (58%), Construct validity (58%), Test validity (57%) ... read more

19,000 Citations


Journal ArticleDOI: 10.1001/JAMA.283.15.2008
Donna F. Stroup1, Jesse A. Berlin2, Sally C. Morton3, Ingram Olkin4  +7 moreInstitutions (8)
19 Apr 2000-JAMA
Abstract: ObjectiveBecause of the pressure for timely, informed decisions in public health and clinical practice and the explosion of information in the scientific literature, research results must be synthesized. Meta-analyses are increasingly used to address this problem, and they often evaluate observational studies. A workshop was held in Atlanta, Ga, in April 1997, to examine the reporting of meta-analyses of observational studies and to make recommendations to aid authors, reviewers, editors, and readers.ParticipantsTwenty-seven participants were selected by a steering committee, based on expertise in clinical practice, trials, statistics, epidemiology, social sciences, and biomedical editing. Deliberations of the workshop were open to other interested scientists. Funding for this activity was provided by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.EvidenceWe conducted a systematic review of the published literature on the conduct and reporting of meta-analyses in observational studies using MEDLINE, Educational Research Information Center (ERIC), PsycLIT, and the Current Index to Statistics. We also examined reference lists of the 32 studies retrieved and contacted experts in the field. Participants were assigned to small-group discussions on the subjects of bias, searching and abstracting, heterogeneity, study categorization, and statistical methods.Consensus ProcessFrom the material presented at the workshop, the authors developed a checklist summarizing recommendations for reporting meta-analyses of observational studies. The checklist and supporting evidence were circulated to all conference attendees and additional experts. All suggestions for revisions were addressed.ConclusionsThe proposed checklist contains specifications for reporting of meta-analyses of observational studies in epidemiology, including background, search strategy, methods, results, discussion, and conclusion. Use of the checklist should improve the usefulness of meta-analyses for authors, reviewers, editors, readers, and decision makers. An evaluation plan is suggested and research areas are explored.

... read more

Topics: Observational study (56%), Checklist (54%), Scientific literature (53%)

15,106 Citations


Open accessJournal ArticleDOI: 10.1001/ARCHINTE.166.10.1092
Abstract: Background Generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) is one of the most common mental disorders; however, there is no brief clinical measure for assessing GAD. The objective of this study was to develop a brief self-report scale to identify probable cases of GAD and evaluate its reliability and validity. Methods A criterion-standard study was performed in 15 primary care clinics in the United States from November 2004 through June 2005. Of a total of 2740 adult patients completing a study questionnaire, 965 patients had a telephone interview with a mental health professional within 1 week. For criterion and construct validity, GAD self-report scale diagnoses were compared with independent diagnoses made by mental health professionals; functional status measures; disability days; and health care use. Results A 7-item anxiety scale (GAD-7) had good reliability, as well as criterion, construct, factorial, and procedural validity. A cut point was identified that optimized sensitivity (89%) and specificity (82%). Increasing scores on the scale were strongly associated with multiple domains of functional impairment (all 6 Medical Outcomes Study Short-Form General Health Survey scales and disability days). Although GAD and depression symptoms frequently co-occurred, factor analysis confirmed them as distinct dimensions. Moreover, GAD and depression symptoms had differing but independent effects on functional impairment and disability. There was good agreement between self-report and interviewer-administered versions of the scale. Conclusion The GAD-7 is a valid and efficient tool for screening for GAD and assessing its severity in clinical practice and research.

... read more

9,723 Citations