The unfolding COVID-19 pandemic: A probability-based, nationally representative study of mental health in the United States

The role of caregiver emotion regulation in youth mental health during the COVID-19 pandemic: A longitudinal study

The COVID-19 pandemic has presented youth and families with a broad spectrum of unique stressors. Given that adolescents are at increased risk for mental health and emotional difficulties, it is critical to explore family processes that confer resilience for youth in the face of stress. The current study investigated caregiver emotion regulation (ER) as a familial factor contributing to youth ER and risk for psychopathology following stressful life events. In a longitudinal sample of 224 youth (M age = 12.65 years) and their caregivers, we examined whether caregiver and youth engagement in ER strategies early in the pandemic mediated the associations of pandemic-related stress with youth internalizing and externalizing symptoms six months later. Leveraging serial mediation analysis, we demonstrated that caregiver and youth rumination, but not expressive suppression or cognitive reappraisal, mediated the prospective associations of pandemic-related stress with youth internalizing and externalizing symptoms. Greater exposure to pandemic-related stressors was associated with greater caregiver rumination, which, in turn, related to greater rumination in youth, and higher levels of youth internalizing and externalizing symptoms thereafter. Family interventions that target caregiver ER, specifically rumination, may buffer against the consequences of stress on youth engagement in maladaptive ER strategies and risk for psychopathology.

A Prospective Examination of Mental Health Trajectories of Disaster-Exposed Young Adults in the COVID-19 Pandemic

This longitudinal study examines young adult mental health (MH) trajectories after exposure to natural disasters (i.e., hurricanes, wildfires, mudslides) across four waves, two pre- and two during the COVID-19 pandemic. Participants (n = 205) answered questions about anxiety, depression, and post-traumatic stress symptoms (PTSSs) across Waves (Ws) s 1-4 and pre-pandemic factors (prior trauma history, disaster exposure, life stressors since disaster) at Wave (W) 1. Hierarchical linear modeling was conducted to examine MH trajectories and associations with pre-pandemic factors. Only the PTSS trajectory significantly differed across all Ws, with the largest increase between Ws 2 and 3 (pre- and during-pandemic time points). Prior trauma history and life stressors since the disaster were significantly associated with all MH trajectory intercepts but not growth rates.

Do behavioral drivers matter for healthcare decision-making during crises? A study of low-income women in El Salvador during the COVID-19 pandemic

Understanding health-seeking behaviors and their drivers is key for governments to manage health policies. A growing body of research explores the role of cognitive biases and heuristics in health and care-seeking behaviors, but little is known about how a context of heightened anxiety and uncertainty might influence these behavioral drivers. This study analyzes the association between four behavioral predictors-internal locus of control, impatience, optimism bias, and aspirations-and healthcare decisions among low-income women in El Salvador, controlling for other factors. We find positive associations between internal locus of control and preventive health behaviors during the COVID-19 pandemic. For instance, a one standard deviation increase in locus of control is associated with a 10% increase in an index measuring the use of masks, distancing, hand washing, and vaccination. Locus of control was also associated with women's use of preventive health services (one standard deviation improves the likelihood of having a hypertension test in the last six months by 5.8 percentage points). In a sub-sample of mothers, we find significant relationships between the four behavioral drivers and the decisions the mothers make for their children. However, we find these associations are less robust compared to the decisions they make for themselves. Some associations were stronger during the pandemic, suggesting that feelings of uncertainty and stress could amplify behavioral drivers' influence on health-related behaviors. This novel finding is relevant for designing policy responses for future shocks. JEL CODES: I12, D10, D91, I30.

Adaptive and maladaptive pathways of COVID-19 worry on well-being: A cross-national study

OBJECTIVE

In a preregistered study, we examined whether worries about COVID-19 are simultaneously linked with enhanced well-being through social interaction and with reduced well-being through depression symptoms.

METHOD

In August 2020, census-matched participants from high- and low-prevalence regions in the United States and Italy (N = 857) completed assessments of COVID-19 worry, social interaction, depression symptoms, and well-being.

RESULTS

Worries about COVID-19 predicted both more social interaction and more depression (ps < 0.001). In multiple mediational analyses, an adaptive pathway of COVID-19 worry through social interaction was associated with higher well-being, whereas a maladaptive pathway through depression symptoms was associated with lower well-being. Further, a comparison of high and low COVID-19 prevalence regions replicated the mediational findings for social interaction, providing evidence against reverse causation and common method variance.

CONCLUSION

Findings suggest that normative worries about acute stressors may both benefit and undermine well-being, depending on their impact on social behavior or depression symptoms.

Evaluation of a Pilot Wellness Elective for Master of Public Health Students during the COVID-19 Pandemic

BACKGROUND

Graduate student wellbeing is a public health issue in the United States. The COVID-19 outbreak exacerbated the mental health burden on graduate students worldwide. Culture of Wellness (PH 104) is a 2-week wellbeing elective course that teaches evidence-based wellbeing strategies for graduate students at a university in the United States. Our study aimed to evaluate the impact of this pilot wellbeing elective on Master of Public Health students' mental health and wellness during the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

Participants included 22 Master of Public Health students from the class of 2021 at a university in the United States. We provided a pre-course survey to students that assessed their perception of their own personal wellbeing, their knowledge about various wellbeing strategies, and their confidence in applying 13 wellbeing strategies before taking the course. Post-course students completed the same survey following course completion, as well as a matching evaluation and a five-month follow up survey.

RESULTS

Of the 13 strategies taught, students reported significant improvements in their ability to apply 10 strategies. There was a significant increase in self-reported emotional and physical wellbeing, as well as a significant decrease in burnout. Five months post-course, more than three quarters of respondents used strategies taught in the course on a weekly basis or more.

LIMITATIONS

This pilot study is limited by its small sample size, which may restrict the generalizability of the findings.

CONCLUSIONS

The PH 104 Culture of Wellness course was effective in improving graduate students' wellbeing and confidence in applying wellbeing strategies.

Associations between mindfulness and mental health after collective trauma: results from a longitudinal, representative, probability-based survey

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES

Trait mindfulness (TM) may protect against post-trauma mental health ailments and related impairment. Few studies have evaluated this association in the context of collective traumas using representative samples or longitudinal designs.

DESIGN/METHOD

We explored relationships between TM and collective trauma-related outcomes in a prospective, representative, probability-based sample of 1846 U.S. Gulf Coast residents repeatedly exposed to catastrophic hurricanes, assessed twice during the COVID-19 outbreak (Wave 1: 5/14/20-5/27/20; Wave 2: 12/21/21-1/11/22). Generalized estimating equations examined longitudinal relationships between TM, COVID-19-related fear/worry, hurricane-related fear/worry, global distress, and functional impairment; ordinary least squares regression analyses examined the cross-sectional association between TM and COVID-19-related posttraumatic stress symptoms (PTSS) at Wave 1. Event-related stressor exposure was explored as a moderator.

RESULTS

In covariate-adjusted models including pre-event mental health ailments and demographics, TM was negatively associated with COVID-19-related fear/worry, hurricane-related fear/worry, global distress, and functional impairment over time; in cross-sectional analyses, TM was negatively associated with COVID-19-related PTSS. TM moderated the relationship between COVID-19 secondary stressor exposure (e.g., lost job/wages) and both global distress and functional impairment over time.

CONCLUSIONS

Results suggest TM may buffer adverse psychosocial outcomes following collective trauma, with some evidence TM may protect against negative effects of secondary stressor exposure.

Assets and depression in U.S. adults during the COVID-19 pandemic: a systematic review

PURPOSE

Mental health is shaped by social and economic contexts, which were altered during the COVID-19 pandemic. No study has systematically reviewed the literature on the relation between different assets and depression during the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review of the literature on financial (e.g. income/savings), physical (e.g., home ownership), and social (e.g., marital status, educational attainment) assets and depression in U.S. adults. For each asset type, we created binary comparisons to report on the direction of the relationship and described if each study reported insignificant, positive, negative, or mixed associations.

RESULTS

Among the 41 articles identified, we found that income was the most studied asset (n=34), followed by education (n=25), marital status (n=18), home ownership (n=5), and savings (n=4). 88%, 100%, and 100% of articles reported a significant association of higher income, home ownership, and higher savings, respectively, with less depression. The association between marital status and education with depression was more nuanced: 72% (13 of 18) studies showed that unmarried persons had greater risk of depression than married or cohabitating persons and 52% (13 of 25) of studies reported no significant difference in depression across educational groups.

CONCLUSION

This work adds to the literature a deeper understanding of how different assets relate to depression. In the context of largescale traumatic events, policies that maintain and protect access to social, physical, and financial assets may help to protect mental health.

Implementing Full Practice Authority for Advanced Practice Registered Nurses: A Case for Mitigating Critical Mental Health Services

The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted some perverse health disparities that we know have long existed in the United States. Disparities related to access, affordability, and cultural appropriateness of care cannot be overemphasized. More importantly, disparities related to provider shortages continue to contribute to adverse patient outcomes, particularly in rural areas and other socioeconomically deprived communities. Despite the push from the National Council of State Boards of Nursing (NCSBN) to ensure adoption and implementation of full practice authority (FPA) of advanced practice registered nurses (APRNs), currently only 28 states in the United States have achieved this goal. In addition, there are some states such as Florida that recently passed legislation supporting FPA for primary care APRNs, yet still have practice restrictions for specialty APRNs, such as mental health. The evidence is clear that patients managed by APRNs have better or comparable outcomes to those managed by physicians; thus, more advocacy is needed to ensure that all states and territories achieve this very important milestone for the profession as it has the potential to foster a collaborative interdisciplinary approach to patient care, which at the same time produces positive patient outcomes, employee satisfaction, and a work environment in which all members of the care team feel valued and autonomous.

Contrasting Objective and Perceived Risk: Predicting COVID-19 Health Behaviors in a Nationally Representative U.S. Sample

BACKGROUND

Individuals confronting health threats may display an optimistic bias such that judgments of their risk for illness or death are unrealistically positive given their objective circumstances.

PURPOSE

We explored optimistic bias for health risks using k-means clustering in the context of COVID-19. We identified risk profiles using subjective and objective indicators of severity and susceptibility risk for COVID-19.

METHODS

Between 3/18/2020-4/18/2020, a national probability sample of 6,514 U.S. residents reported both their subjective risk perceptions (e.g., perceived likelihood of illness or death) and objective risk indices (e.g., age, weight, pre-existing conditions) of COVID-19-related susceptibility and severity, alongside other pandemic-related experiences. Six months later, a subsample (N = 5,661) completed a follow-up survey with questions about their frequency of engagement in recommended health protective behaviors (social distancing, mask wearing, risk behaviors, vaccination intentions).

RESULTS

The k-means clustering procedure identified five risk profiles in the Wave 1 sample; two of these demonstrated aspects of optimistic bias, representing almost 44% of the sample. In OLS regression models predicting health protective behavior adoption at Wave 2, clusters representing individuals with high perceived severity risk were most likely to report engagement in social distancing, but many individuals who were objectively at high risk for illness and death did not report engaging in self-protective behaviors.

CONCLUSIONS

Objective risk of disease severity only inconsistently predicted health protective behavior. Risk profiles may help identify groups that need more targeted interventions to increase their support for public health policy and health enhancing recommendations more broadly.

Who Engaged in Home-Based Arts Activities During the COVID-19 Pandemic? A Cross-Sectional Analysis of Data From 4,731 Adults in the United States

Arts engagement is a health-related behavior that may be influenced by social inequalities. While the COVID-19 pandemic provided new opportunities for some people to engage in the arts, it might have created barriers for others. We aimed to examine whether there was social patterning in home-based arts engagement during the pandemic in the United States, and whether predictors of engagement differed according to the type of arts activity. We included 4,731 adults who participated in the United States COVID-19 Social Study between April and July 2020. Three types of home-based arts engagement were considered: reading for pleasure, arts or crafts activities, and digital arts activities. Using logistic regression models, we tested cross-sectional associations between a broad range of demographic, socioeconomic, psychosocial, and health-related factors as well as adverse events and worries during lockdown and each type of arts engagement. The factors most strongly associated with all three types of arts engagement were social support, social network size, age, race/ethnicity, keyworker status, and experiencing physical or psychological abuse during the pandemic. However, most socioeconomic and health-related factors were not associated with arts engagement, including household income and mental and physical health problems. Overall, our findings indicate that the social gradient in arts engagement was reduced in the first 4 months of the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States. Given the health benefits of arts engagement, the potential diversification of arts audiences during the pandemic is promising for both population-level health and wellbeing and the future of the arts and cultural sector.

The mental burden of stay-at-home order extensions during COVID-19

This study evaluates the psychological impact of stay-at-home extension orders during COVID-19 and its relationship with individuals' expectations on the duration of the extensions. An online survey was administered to 1259 US adult residents to measure symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), anxiety and stress induced by different stay-at-home order extensions using hypothetical length scenarios. We find that individuals exposed to two 2-week order extensions exhibit higher levels of stress and anxiety compared to those exposed to a single 4-week extension. We also find that subjects with longer expected extensions exhibit more signs of psychological damage than those with shorter expected extensions. Furthermore, we find that the negative psychological consequences of providing two shorter extensions is observed only among subjects with extension expectations of four weeks or less. Our results demonstrate that people's expectations affect the level of psychological damage caused by lockdown mandates. Our findings suggest that whenever lockdown extensions are necessary, reduced psychological distress may be possible by implementing a one-time restriction, rather than extending multiple smaller extensions perhaps due to manipulation of personal expectations.

Social experiences and youth psychopathology during the COVID-19 pandemic: A longitudinal study

The early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic and associated stay-at-home orders resulted in a stark reduction in daily social interactions for children and adolescents. Given that peer relationships are especially important during this developmental stage, it is crucial to understand the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on social behavior and risk for psychopathology in children and adolescents. In a longitudinal sample (N=224) of children (7-10y) and adolescents (13-15y) assessed at three strategic time points (before the pandemic, during the initial stay-at-home order period, and six months later after the initial stay-at-home order period was lifted), we examine whether certain social factors protect against increases in stress-related psychopathology during the pandemic, controlling for pre-pandemic symptoms. Youth who reported less in-person and digital socialization, greater social isolation, and less social support had worsened psychopathology during the pandemic. Greater social isolation and decreased digital socialization during the pandemic were associated with greater risk for psychopathology after experiencing pandemic-related stressors. In addition, children, but not adolescents, who maintained some in-person socialization were less likely to develop internalizing symptoms following exposure to pandemic-related stressors. We identify social factors that promote well-being and resilience in youth during this societal event.

Residential mobility restrictions and adverse mental health outcomes during the COVID-19 pandemic in the UK

During the COVID-19 pandemic, several governments tried to contain the spread of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, with lockdowns that prohibited leaving one's residence unless carrying out a few essential services. We investigate the relationship between limitations to mobility and mental health in the UK during the first year and a half of the pandemic using a unique combination of high-frequency mobility data from Google and monthly longitudinal data collected through the Understanding Society survey. We find a strong and statistically robust correlation between mobility data and mental health survey data and show that increased residential stationarity is associated with the deterioration of mental wellbeing even when regional COVID-19 prevalence and lockdown stringency are controlled for. The relationship is heterogeneous, as higher levels of distress are seen in young, healthy people living alone; and in women, especially if they have young children.

Daily positive and negative affect during the COVID-19 pandemic

The COVID-19 pandemic influenced emotional experiences globally. We examined daily positive and negative affect between May/June 2020 and February 2021 (N = 151,049; 3,509,982 observations) using a convenience sample from a national mobile application-based survey that asked for daily affect reports. Four questions were examined: (1) How did people in the United States feel from May/June 2020 to February 2021?; (2) What demographic variables are related to positive and negative affect?; (3) What is the relationship between experienced stressors and daily affect?; and (4) What is the relationship between daily affect and preventive behavior? Positive affect increased, and negative decreased over time. Demographic differences mirrored those from before the pandemic (e.g., younger participants reported more negative and less positive affect). Stressors such as feeling unwell, experiencing COVID-19 symptoms, exposure to COVID-19, and lack of sleep were associated with less positive and more negative affect. Exercising protective behaviors predicted future affect, and affect also predicted future protective behaviors (e.g., less protective behavior when happy but more when grateful and thoughtful). The implications for public health communication were discussed.

Mental health effects of social distancing in Switzerland

This analysis examines the effect of COVID-19 on public mental health in Switzerland. Following an event-study framework, we compare helpline call volume and duration before and after the outbreak of the first and second wave. The use of administrative phone-level data allows us to i) decompose the total effects into an intensive and extensive margin and ii) calculate a measure of unmet need. For the first wave, our results show that callers with a history of helpline contacts increase calls substantially. We also identify capacity constraints leading to unmet need for psychological counseling. Finally, we find no effects in the second wave, which might be explained by a number of factors including the absence of a lockdown and less restrictive social distancing measures.

Uncertainty in the association between socio-demographic characteristics and mental health

Questionnaires are among the most basic and widespread tools to assess the mental health of a population in epidemiological and public health studies. Their most obvious advantage (firsthand self-report) is also the source of their main problems: the raw data requires interpretation, and are a snapshot of the specific sample's status at a given time. Efforts to deal with both issues created a bi-dimensional space defined by two orthogonal axes, in which most of the quantitative mental health research can be located. Methods aimed to assure that mental health diagnoses are solidly grounded on existing raw data are part of the individual validity axis. Tools allowing the generalization of the results across the entire population compose the collective validity axis. This paper raises a different question. Since one goal of mental health assessments is to obtain results that can be generalized to some extent, an important question is how robust is a questionnaire result when applied to a different population or to the same population at a different time. In this case, there is deep uncertainty, without any a priori probabilistic information. The main claim of this paper is that this task requires the development of a new robustness to deep uncertainty axis, defining a three-dimensional research space. We demonstrate the analysis of deep uncertainty using the concept of robustness in info-gap decision theory. Based on data from questionnaires collected before and during the Covid-19 pandemic, we first locate a mental health assessment in the space defined by the individual validity axis and the collective validity axis. Then we develop a model of info-gap robustness to uncertainty in mental health assessment, showing how the robustness to deep uncertainty axis interacts with the other two axes, highlighting the contributions and the limitations of this approach. The ability to measure robustness to deep uncertainty in the mental health realm is important particularly in troubled and changing times. In this paper, we provide the basic methodological building blocks of the suggested approach using the outbreak of Covid-19 as a recent example.

The psychological impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on business leadership

The COVID-19 pandemic had a profound impact on business leadership, specifically on chief executive officers (CEOs). To document the psychological impacts of the pandemic on corporate leadership, this study analyzed the language of CEOs during company quarterly earnings calls (N = 19,536) one year before and after the onset of the pandemic. Following the start of lockdowns, CEOs exhibited significant language shifts. Analytic thinking declined, and their language became less technical and more personal and intuitive. CEOs also showed signs of increased cognitive load as they grappled with the pandemic's impact on their business practices. The study observed a substantial decrease in collective-focused language (we-usage) among CEOs, indicative of disconnection from their companies. Concurrently, there was an increase in self-focused (I-usage) language, suggesting heightened preoccupation among business leaders. The observed language changes reflect the unique effect of the pandemic on CEOs, which had some notable differences compared to the general population. This study sheds light on how the COVID-19 pandemic influenced business leaders' psychological states and decision-making strategies-processes that have a substantial impact on a company's performance. The findings underscore the importance of language data in understanding large-scale societal events.

Age Differences in Mental Health During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Assessing the Moderating Role of Attachment to God

Objectives: This study examined age differences in mental health problems (depression and anxiety) during the COVID-19 pandemic using nationally representative data from the United States. Drawing from a life course perspective, we also assessed if a secure attachment to God conditioned the relationship between age and mental health. Methods: Data were from the 2021 Values and Beliefs of the American Public Study (N = 1168), collected roughly 1 year into the pandemic. Results: Older adults (61 years and over) reported lower depression and anxiety than respondents 18-30 years of age. However, stronger perceptions of attachment to God significantly closed the age gap in anxiety between these age groups. Discussion: Though absolute levels of religiosity tend to be higher for older adults, secure attachment to God was more protective of the mental health of younger adults during the pandemic. We reflect on our findings through a life course lens.

The Process Model of Emotion Regulation Questionnaire: Assessing Individual Differences in Strategy Stage and Orientation

The study of individual differences in emotion regulation has typically focused exclusively either on the stage of the emotion generation process at which regulation occurs or on the engagement versus disengagement orientation of the regulation efforts. We introduce a new measure that samples equally across each stage of the process model of emotion regulation and from both engagement and disengagement orientations. Through five studies (ntotal = 2,543), we present the development and convergent, discriminant, and predictive validity evidence for the Process Model of Emotion Regulation Questionnaire (PMERQ). We show the final 10-scale 45-item questionnaire has acceptable internal consistency, is invariant between genders and across the age range, and has sufficient convergent and discriminant validity. The PMERQ also predicts affective and relationship functioning with strategies occurring earlier in the process model generally showing the strongest effects. We propose the PMERQ is a valuable measure to assess individual differences in the use of emotion regulation strategies.

COVID-19 stressors and mental health problems amongst women who arrived as refugees and those born in Australia

Women from refugee background residing in high income countries are at greater mental health risk during the COVID-19 pandemic given their higher baseline prevalence of mental disorders, trauma exposures and social adversities. During the COVID-19 pandemic we drew on data from wave-4 of the WATCH cohort study, collected between October 2019 and June 2021. We conducted a cross-sectional analysis to compare the prevalence of common mental disorders (CMDs) from the sample of 650 consecutively recruited women, 339 (52.2%) from the refugee-background who were resettled in Australia and 311 (48.8%) randomly and contemporaneously selected Australian born women. We assessed COVID-19 psychosocial stressors: 1. COVID-related material hardship and 2. COVID-related fear and stress. We examined for associations between scores on these two items and CMDs in each group respectively. Compared to Australian-born woman, women from refugee background recorded a significantly higher prevalence of Major Depressive Disorder (MDD) (19.8% vs 13.5%), PTSD (9.7% vs 5.1%), Separation Anxiety Disorder (SEPAD) (19.8% vs 13.5%) and Persistent Complicated Bereavement Disorder (PCBD) (6.5% vs 2.9%). In refugee women, associations were found between COVID-related material hardship and CMDs [MDD, Relative Risk (RR) = 1.39, 95%CI: 1.02-1.89, p = 0.02] as well as between COVID-related fear and stress and CMDs (MDD, RR = 1.74, 95%CI: 1.04-2.90, p = 0.02 p = 0.02). For Australian-born women, associations were more commonly found between CMDs and material hardship. Our study demonstrates that both women from refugee background and those born in Australia are experiencing significant rates of CMD during the pandemic and that material hardship is an associated factor. We found that women from refugee background are at greater risk for mental health problems and are more likely to report an association of those problems with fear and stress related to COVID_19. All women, and particularly those from refugee background, require urgent and specialised attention to their mental health and psychosocial problems during this pandemic.

The 'welcomed lockdown' hypothesis? Mental wellbeing and mobility restrictions

The COVID-19 pandemic and its mobility restrictions have been an external shock, influencing mental wellbeing. However, does risk exposure to COVID-19 affect the mental wellbeing effect of lockdowns? This paper examines the 'welcomed lockdown' hypothesis, namely the extent to which there is a level of risk where mobility restrictions are not a hindrance to mental wellbeing. We exploit the differential timing of exposure the pandemic, and the different stringency of lockdown policies across European countries and we focus on the effects on two mental health conditions, namely anxiety and depression. We study whether differences in the individual symptoms of anxiety and depression are explained by the combination of pandemic mortality and stringency of lockdown. We draw on an event study approach, complemented with a Difference-in-Difference (DiD), and Regression Discontinuity Design (RDD). Our estimates suggest an average increase in depression (3.95%) and anxiety (10%) symptoms relative to the mean level on the day that lockdown took effect. However, such effects are wiped out when a country's exhibits high mortality ('pandemic category 5'). Hence, we conclude that in an environment of high mortality, lockdowns no longer give rise to a reduction in mental wellbeing consistent with the 'welcome lockdown' hypothesis.

Coping with COVID: risk and resilience factors for mental health in a German representative panel study

BACKGROUND

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic might affect mental health. Data from population-representative panel surveys with multiple waves including pre-COVID data investigating risk and protective factors are still rare.

METHODS

In a stratified random sample of the German household population (n = 6684), we conducted survey-weighted multiple linear regressions to determine the association of various psychological risk and protective factors assessed between 2015 and 2020 with changes in psychological distress [(PD; measured via Patient Health Questionnaire for Depression and Anxiety (PHQ-4)] from pre-pandemic (average of 2016 and 2019) to peri-pandemic (both 2020 and 2021) time points. Control analyses on PD change between two pre-pandemic time points (2016 and 2019) were conducted. Regularized regressions were computed to inform on which factors were statistically most influential in the multicollinear setting.

RESULTS

PHQ-4 scores in 2020 (M = 2.45) and 2021 (M = 2.21) were elevated compared to 2019 (M = 1.79). Several risk factors (catastrophizing, neuroticism, and asking for instrumental support) and protective factors (perceived stress recovery, positive reappraisal, and optimism) were identified for the peri-pandemic outcomes. Control analyses revealed that in pre-pandemic times, neuroticism and optimism were predominantly related to PD changes. Regularized regression mostly confirmed the results and highlighted perceived stress recovery as most consistent influential protective factor across peri-pandemic outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

We identified several psychological risk and protective factors related to PD outcomes during the COVID-19 pandemic. A comparison of pre-pandemic data stresses the relevance of longitudinal assessments to potentially reconcile contradictory findings. Implications and suggestions for targeted prevention and intervention programs during highly stressful times such as pandemics are discussed.

Media exposure, threat processing, and mitigation behaviors in Gulf Coast residents facing the co-occurring threats of COVID-19 and hurricanes

The 2020 hurricane season threatened millions of Americans concurrently grappling with COVID-19. Processes guiding individual-level mitigation for these conceptually distinct threats, one novel and chronic (COVID-19), the other familiar and episodic (hurricanes), are unknown. Theories of health protective behaviors suggest that inputs from external stimuli (e.g., traditional and social media) lead to threat processing, including perceived efficacy (self- and response) and perceived threat (susceptibility and severity), guiding mitigation behavior. We surveyed a representative sample of Florida and Texas residents (N = 1846) between April 14, 2020 and April 27, 2020; many had previous hurricane exposure; all were previously assessed between September 8, 2017 and September 11, 2017. Using preregistered analyses, two generalized structural equation models tested direct and indirect effects of media exposure (traditional media, social media) on self-reported (1) COVID-19 mitigation (handwashing, mask-wearing, social distancing) and (2) hurricane mitigation (preparation behaviors), as mediated through perceived efficacy (self- and response) and perceived threat (susceptibility and severity). Self-efficacy and response efficacy were associated with social distancing (p = .002), handwashing, mask-wearing, and hurricane preparation (ps < 0.001). Perceived susceptibility was positively associated with social distancing (p = 0.017) and hurricane preparation (p < 0.001). Perceived severity was positively associated with social distancing (p < 0.001). Traditional media exhibited indirect effects on COVID-19 mitigation through increased response efficacy (ps < 0.05), and to a lesser extent self-efficacy (p < 0.05), and on hurricane preparation through increased self-efficacy and response efficacy and perceived susceptibility (ps < 0.05). Social media did not exhibit indirect effects on COVID-19 or hurricane mitigation. Communications targeting efficacy and susceptibility may encourage mitigation behavior; research should explore how social media campaigns can more effectively target threat processing, guiding protective actions.

Heterogeneous Mental Health Responses to the COVID-19 Pandemic in Germany: An Examination of Long-Term Trajectories, Risk Factors, and Vulnerable Groups

Abundant studies have examined mental health in the early periods of the COVID-19 pandemic. However, empirical work examining the mental health impact of the pandemic's subsequent phases remains limited. In the present study, we investigated how mental vulnerability and resilience evolved over the various phases of the pandemic in 2020 and 2021 in Germany. Data were collected (n = 3522) across seven measurement occasions using validated and self-generated measures of vulnerability and resilience. We found evidence for an immediate increase in vulnerability during the first lockdown in Germany, a trend towards recovery when lockdown measures were eased, and an increase in vulnerability with each passing month of the second lockdown. Four different latent trajectories of resilience-vulnerability emerged, with the majority of participants displaying a rather resilient trajectory, but nearly 30% of the sample fell into the more vulnerable groups. Females, younger individuals, those with a history of psychiatric disorders, lower income groups, and those with high trait vulnerability and low trait social belonging were more likely to exhibit trajectories associated with poorer mental well-being. Our findings indicate that resilience-vulnerability responses in Germany during the COVID-19 pandemic may have been more complex than previously thought, identifying risk groups that could benefit from greater support.

PTSD Symptoms and Hazardous Drinking Indicators among Trauma-Exposed Sexual Minority Women during Heightened Societal Stress

Trauma-exposed sexual minority women (SMW) are at elevated risk of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and hazardous drinking compared to trauma-exposed heterosexual women. To understand whether these problems might be exacerbated during times of elevated societal stress, we collected data from a New York-based sample of trauma-exposed SMW between April 2020 and August 2020, a period of notable, compounding societal stressors, including: (a) living in or near one of the first epicenters of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) epidemic in the United States and (b) living through multiple high-profile occurrences of racism-related police violence and subsequent racial unrest. SMW (n = 68) completed online self-report questionnaires related to trauma, PTSD symptoms, and alcohol use, and a subset (n = 29) completed semi-structured qualitative interviews. PsycINFO was searched with terms related to SMW, PTSD, and alcohol use to identify studies with samples of SMW from articles published within the last 10 years to which we could compare our sample; this produced nine studies. Welch's t-tests and Chi-square analyses revealed that SMW within our sample reported significantly higher PTSD symptom severity, probable PTSD, and hazardous drinking indicators (i.e., alcohol use disorder and heavy episodic drinking) between April 2020 and August 2020 compared to similar samples (i.e., trauma-exposed SMW and general samples of SMW) assessed previously. Qualitative reports also indicated that the societal stressors of 2020 contributed to mental and behavioral health concerns. These results underscore the need for integrated PTSD and alcohol use prevention and intervention efforts for trauma-exposed SMW during times of heightened societal stress.Supplemental data for this article is available online at https://doi.org/10.1080/08964289.2021.2006132 .

A longitudinal study of predictors of serious psychological distress during COVID-19 pandemic

BACKGROUND

The prevalence of serious psychological distress (SPD) was elevated during the COVID-19 pandemic in the USA, but the relationships of SPD during the pandemic with pre-pandemic SPD, pre-pandemic socioeconomic status, and pandemic-related social stressors remain unexamined.

METHODS

A probability-based sample (N = 1751) of the US population age 20 and over was followed prospectively from February 2019 (T1), with subsequent interviews in May 2020 (T2) and August 2020 (T3). Multinomial logistic regression was used to assess prospective relationships between T1 SPD with experiences of disruption of employment, health care, and childcare at T2. Binary logistic regression was then used to assess relationships of T1 SPD, and socioeconomic status and T2 pandemic-related stressors with T3 SPD.

RESULTS

At T1, SPD was associated with age, race/ethnicity, and household income. SPD at T1 predicted disruption of employment (OR 4.5, 95% CI 1.4-3.8) and health care (OR 3.2, 95% CI 1.4-7.1) at T2. SPD at T1 (OR 10.2, 95% CI 4.5-23.3), low household income at T1 (OR 2.6, 95% CI 1.1-6.4), disruption of employment at T2 (OR 3.2, 95% CI 1.4-7.6), and disruption of healthcare at T2 (OR 3.3, 95% CI 1.5-7.2) were all significantly associated with elevated risk for SPD at T3.

CONCLUSIONS

Elevated risk for SPD during the COVID-19 pandemic is related to multiple psychological and social pathways that are likely to interact over the life course. Policies and interventions that target individuals with pre-existing mental health conditions as well as those experiencing persistent unemployment should be high priorities in the mental health response to the pandemic.

The Impact of Systemic Lupus Erythematosus-Related Respiratory Manifestations on the Quality of Life and Psychological Health of Patients During the COVID-19 Pandemic

Introduction Respiratory manifestations are common among patients with Systemic Lupus Erythematosus (SLE) and can present as chest pain, dyspnea, and cough and are often accompanied by fever. These symptoms can resemble those of COVID-19, which may cause increased anxiety in SLE patients. Therefore, the aim of this study is to investigate the impact of SLE-related respiratory manifestations on anxiety, depression, and quality of life among SLE patients during the COVID-19 pandemic. Patients and methods The study involved SLE patients and was conducted in the year 2020, after the start of the pandemic in Morocco, using a cross-sectional design. Anxiety and depression were evaluated using the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), while the quality of life was assessed using the Short Form-12 Health Survey (SF12). Statistical analysis was performed using R software (R Foundation, Vienna, Austria). Results A total of 102 SLE patients, with an average age of 41.6 ± 13.7 years, participated in the study, of whom 92.2% were female. Respiratory manifestations were reported by 20.6% of the patients, and there were no significant differences observed in the general characteristics of the study population between the two groups with and without SLE-related respiratory manifestations. The study found that the prevalence of anxiety and depression was significantly higher in patients with SLE-related respiratory manifestations (50% Vs. 76,2% and 50% Vs. 85,7% successively). These patients also reported significantly more impairment in their physical quality of life (31.8 ± 8.9 Vs. 38.5 ± 10.9). This was observed across three domains of the SF12 survey, including physical functioning (34.4 ± 11.4 Vs. 39.9 ± 11.7), bodily pain (26.9 ± 11.2 Vs. 36.1 ± 14.3), and general health (28.6 ± 10.7 Vs. 35.2 ± 12.3). Although the association between mental quality of life and respiratory manifestations did not reach statistical significance (33.5 ± 12.5 Vs. 39.1 ± 11.5), there was a trend toward poorer mental quality of life in patients with SLE-related respiratory manifestations. Moreover, two domains of mental quality of life were significantly more affected in these patients, namely "social functioning" (30.6 ± 11.3 Vs. 38.7 ± 12.4) and "role-emotional" (26.8 ± 11.6 Vs. 33.8 ± 10.8). Conclusion During the COVID-19 pandemic, the presence of SLE-related respiratory manifestations appeared to be associated with a more negative impact on the psychological health and quality of life of SLE patients.

The road to postpandemic recovery in the USA: a repeated cross-sectional survey of multidimensional well-being over two years

OBJECTIVES

Examine differences in multidimensional well-being from before (January 2020) to three timepoints during the COVID-19 pandemic (June 2020, January 2021, January 2022).

STUDY DESIGN

Repeated cross-sectional design.

METHODS

Nationally representative cross-sectional cohorts of US adults completed the Secure Flourish Index before (January 2020 cohort: N = 1010) and during the COVID-19 pandemic (June 2020 cohort: N = 3020; January 2021 cohort: N = 3366; January 2022 cohort: N = 2598). We estimated differences in indicators, domains, and composite well-being between the January 2020 cohort and each of the subsequent cohorts. We also explored whether changes in well-being between January 2020 and January 2022 varied based on age, gender, and race/ethnicity.

RESULTS

Initial declines in well-being observed by June 2020 were largely followed by a return to prepandemic levels in January 2022, with some exceptions. Notably, general declines in mental health have persisted through to January 2022. On the other hand, there was evidence of general improvements in character & virtue that exceeded prepandemic levels in January 2022. Young adults and racial/ethnic minorities reported lower financial & material stability in January 2022 compared to before the COVID-19 pandemic.

CONCLUSIONS

Although there are promising signs that the well-being of US adults has mostly recovered to prepandemic levels, a coordinated response is urgently needed to support population mental health and the financial security of vulnerable groups. As society continues the journey toward postpandemic recovery, continued tracking of multidimensional well-being will be important for making informed decisions about public health priorities.

Psychology Meets Biology in COVID-19: What We Know and Why It Matters for Public Health

Psychosocial factors are related to immune, viral, and vaccination outcomes. Yet, this knowledge has been poorly represented in public health initiatives during the COVID-19 pandemic. This review provides an overview of biopsychosocial links relevant to COVID-19 outcomes by describing seminal evidence about these associations known prepandemic as well as contemporary research conducted during the pandemic. This focuses on the negative impact of the pandemic on psychosocial health and how this in turn has likely consequences for critically relevant viral and vaccination outcomes. We end by looking forward, highlighting the potential of psychosocial interventions that could be leveraged to support all people in navigating a postpandemic world and how a biopsychosocial approach to health could be incorporated into public health responses to future pandemics.

Prevalence of depressive symptoms in U.S. adults during the COVID-19 pandemic: A systematic review

The COVID-19 pandemic has led to a worsening of mental health among U.S. adults. However, no review to date has synthesized the overall prevalence of population depressive symptoms in the U.S. over the COVID-19 pandemic. We aimed to document the population prevalence of depressive symptoms and psychological distress across time since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, both to identify patterns that emerged in the literature and to assess the data sources, methods, sampling, and measurement used to examine population mental health during the pandemic. In a systematic review of the peer review literature, we identified 49 articles reporting 88 prevalence points of depressive symptoms and related constructs in nationally representative samples of U.S. adults from March 2020 to June 2021. First, we found that the average prevalence of poor mental health across studies was 12.9% for severe depression, 26.0% for at least moderate depression, and 36.0% for at least mild depression. Second, we found that women reported significantly higher prevalence of probable depression than men in 63% of studies that reported depression levels by gender and that results on statistically significant differences between racial and ethnic groups were mixed. Third, we found that the 49 articles published were based on 12 studies; the most common sources were the Household Pulse Survey (n = 15, 31%), the AmeriSpeak panel (n = 8, 16%), the Qualtrics panel (n = 8, 16%), and the Understanding America Study (n = 5, 10%). Prevalence estimates varied based on mental health screening instruments and cutoffs used. The most commonly used instruments were the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ) (n = 36, 73%) and the Kessler (n = 8, 16%) series. While the prevalence of population depression varied over time depending on the survey instruments, severity, and constructs reported, the overall prevalence of depression remained high from March 2020 through June 2021 across instruments and severity. Understanding the scope of population mental health can help policymakers and providers address and prepare to meet the ongoing and future mental health needs of U.S. adults in the post-COVID-19 context and beyond.

Changes in Mental Health, Emotional Distress, and Substance Use Affecting Women Experiencing Violence and Their Service Providers during COVID-19 in a U.S. Southern State

Research conducted during the COVID-19 pandemic has revealed many unintended consequences of mandated safety precautions, including increased perpetration of intimate partner violence (IPV), increases in substance use, and worsening mental health conditions. We conducted a repeated, cross-sectional survey of survivors of IPV, a longitudinal survey of service providers working in an IPV shelter, and interviews with both. We conducted surveys at the beginning of the pandemic and nearly half a year later to assess mental health and, for clients, substance use. Results showed that two small samples of survivors living in the shelter in 2020 and 2021 experienced both mental health decline and increased use of substances. Qualitative data from in-depth interviews suggest that COVID-19-related restrictions mirrored survivors' experiences of power and control in violent relationships. Further, IPV service providers-essential workers during COVID-19-experienced stress associated with reports of burnout and mental fatigue. This study suggests that community-based organizations can help mitigate the impacts of COVID-19 on survivors of IPV but should avoid adding additional work for staff as service providers experienced mental and emotional stress.

Mental health impact of the COVID-19 pandemic in U.S. military veterans: a population-based, prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

The coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has caused myriad health, social, and economic stressors. To date, however, no known study has examined changes in mental health during the pandemic in the U.S. military veteran population.

METHODS

Data were analyzed from the 2019-2020 National Health and Resilience in Veterans Study, a nationally representative, prospective cohort survey of 3078 veterans. Pre-to-peri-pandemic changes in psychiatric symptoms were evaluated, as well as pre-pandemic risk and protective factors and pandemic-related correlates of increased psychiatric distress.

RESULTS

The prevalence of generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) positive screens increased from pre- to peri-pandemic (7.1% to 9.4%; p < 0.001) and was driven by an increase among veterans aged 45-64 years (8.2% to 13.5%; p < 0.001), but the prevalence of major depressive disorder and posttraumatic stress disorder positive screens remained stable. Using a continuous measure of psychiatric distress, an estimated 13.2% of veterans reported a clinically meaningful pre-to-peri-pandemic increase in distress (mean = 1.1 standard deviation). Veterans with a larger pre-pandemic social network size and secure attachment style were less likely to experience increased distress, whereas veterans reporting more pre-pandemic loneliness were more likely to experience increased distress. Concerns about pandemic-related social losses, mental health COVID-19 effects, and housing stability during the pandemic were associated with increased distress, over-and-above pre-pandemic factors.

CONCLUSIONS

Although most U.S. veterans showed resilience to mental health problems nearly 1 year into the pandemic, the prevalence of GAD positive screens increased, particularly among middle-aged veterans, and one of seven veterans experienced increased distress. Clinical implications of these findings are discussed.

Sex differences in changes of depressive symptoms among older adults before and during the COVID-19 pandemic: evidence from two longitudinal cohorts

BACKGROUND

Major concerns about the adverse mental health impact of the rapidly spread COVID-19 pandemic have been raised. Previous studies on changes of depressive symptoms during the COVID-19 pandemic have yielded inconsistent results regarding the sex differences. Since women have higher depressive symptoms even without the pandemic, it is essential to consider the pre-existing change of depressive symptoms of a similar period to discern the effect of the pandemic on depression. This study aimed to evaluate sex differences in depressive symptoms before and during the pandemic.

METHODS

Data from the Health and Retirement Study (HRS; waves 13 to 15) and the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing (ELSA; wave 8 to COVID-19 wave 2) were analyzed. Depressive symptoms were assessed by the 8-item Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression (CES-D) scale. According to the time of COVID-19 outbreak in the US and the UK, the intervals from waves 13 to 14 surveys of the HRS and from waves 8 to 9 surveys of the ELSA were employed as pre-pandemic periods to control for the pre-existing depressive symptoms, respectively. Changes of CES-D scores during the pre-pandemic and pandemic periods were assessed by linear mixed models.

RESULTS

Nine thousand, seven hundred thirty-seven participants (mean age: 66.7 ± 10.7 years) from the HRS and 5,098 participants (mean age: 68.7 ± 10.0 years) from the ELSA were included. CES-D scores among women were significantly higher than those among men at all waves in both cohorts. During the pre-pandemic period, no significant sex difference on changes of CES-D scores was detected in either the HRS or the ELSA. During the pandemic period, CES-D scores were increased in both men and women and the sex differences in CES-D increments of the two cohorts were both significant. Enlarged sex differences were demonstrated in increments of CES-D scores during the pandemic period.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results suggest women suffered from worse depressive symptoms in response to the pandemic, although the changes of depression were similar between men and women before the pandemic. These findings underscore the necessity to support the vulnerable populations, especially women, to manage the distress brought by the pandemic and maintain optimal mental health status.

Cognitive decline among older adults with heart diseases before and during the COVID-19 pandemic: A longitudinal cohort study

Background

Little is known about the impact induced by the COVID-19 pandemic on the cognitive function of older adults with heart diseases. This study aimed to examine whether older adults with heart diseases suffered larger cognitive deterioration during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Methods

This study leveraged longitudinal data from the Health and Retirement Study (HRS), a nationally representative U.S. aging cohort with objective cognitive assessments measured before and during the pandemic. The interval from HRS waves 13 to 14 (April 2016 to June 2019) was defined as the pre-pandemic period to control the pre-existed cognitive difference between participants with and without heart diseases, and the interval from waves 14 to 15 (June 2019 to June 2021) was defined as the pandemic period. The HRS wave 14 survey was considered the baseline. The heart disease status was defined by a self-reported diagnosis. Linear mixed models were performed to evaluate and compare the cognitive differences during different periods.

Results

A total of 9,304 participants (women: 5,655, 60.8%; mean age: 65.8 ± 10.8 years) were included, and 2,119 (22.8%) had heart diseases. During the pre-pandemic period, there was no significant difference (-0.03, 95% CI: -0.22 to 0.15, P = 0.716) in the changes in global cognitive scores between participants with and without heart disease. During the pandemic period, a larger decreased change in the global cognitive score was observed in the heart disease group compared with the non-heart disease group (-0.37, 95% CI: -0.55 to -0.19, P < 0.001). An enlarged difference in global cognitive score was observed during the pandemic period (-0.33, 95% CI: -0.65 to -0.02, P = 0.036).

Conclusion

The findings demonstrated that the population with heart diseases suffered more cognitive decline related to the pandemic, underscoring the necessity to provide immediate cognitive monitoring and interventions for the population with heart diseases.

Factors associated with COVID-19-related mental health among Asian Indians in the United States

Background

In the United States, the COVID-19 pandemic has caused increased mental health symptoms and mental illness. Specific subgroups such as Asian Indians in the US have also been subject to additional stressors due to unprecedented loss of lives in their home country and increased Asian hate due to the misperception that Asians are to be blamed for the spread of the SARS-CoV-2.

Objective

We examined the various factors including discrimination associated with COVID-19-related mental health symptoms among Asian Indians.

Methods

We administered an online survey between May 2021 and July 2021 using convenient and snowball sampling methods to recruit Asian Indian adults (age > 18 years, N = 289). The survey included questions on mental health and the experience with unfair treatment in day-to-day life. Descriptive analysis and logistic regressions were performed.

Results

Overall, 46.0% reported feeling down, depressed, or lonely and feeling nervous, tense, or worried due to the COVID-19 pandemic; 90.0% had received at least one dose of vaccination and 74.7% reported some form of discrimination. In the fully-adjusted logistic regression, age (AOR = 0.95; 95%CI- 0.92, 0.97;p < 0.01) and general health (AOR=0.84; 95%CI- 0.73, 0.97; p < 0.015) were negatively associated with mental health symptoms. Participants who experienced discrimination were more likely (AOR=1.26; 95%CI- 1.08, 1.46; p < 0.01) to report mental health symptoms.

Conclusion

In this highly vaccinated group of Asian Indians discriminatory behaviors were associated with mental health symptoms suggesting the need for novel institutional level policy responses to reduce anti-Asian racism.

Believing and sharing misinformation, fact-checks, and accurate information on social media: The role of anxiety during COVID-19

The COVID-19 pandemic went hand in hand with what some have called a "(mis)infodemic" about the virus on social media. Drawing on partisan motivated reasoning and partisan selective sharing, this study examines the influence of political viewpoints, anxiety, and the interactions of the two on believing and willingness to share false, corrective, and accurate claims about COVID-19 on social media. A large-scale 2 (emotion: anxiety vs relaxation) × 2 (slant of news outlet: MSNBC vs Fox News) experimental design with 719 US participants shows that anxiety is a driving factor in belief in and willingness to share claims of any type. Especially for Republicans, a state of heightened anxiety leads them to believe and share more claims. Our findings expand research on partisan motivated reasoning and selective sharing in online settings, and enhance the understanding of how anxiety shapes individuals' processing of risk-related claims in issue contexts with high uncertainty.

Network analysis of internet addiction and depression among Chinese college students during the COVID-19 pandemic: A longitudinal study

Background

There has been growing evidence of comorbidity between internet addiction and depression in youth during the COVID-19 period. According to the network theory, this may arise from the interplay of symptoms shared by these two mental disorders. Therefore, we examined this underlying process by measuring the changes in the central and bridge symptoms of the co-occurrence networks across time.

Methods

A total of 852 Chinese college students were recruited during two waves (T1: August 2020; T2: November 2020), and reported their internet addiction symptoms and depressive symptoms. Network analysis was utilized for the statistical analysis.

Results

The internet addiction symptoms "escape" and "irritable," and depression symptoms "energy" and "guilty" were the central symptoms for both waves. At the same time, "guilty" and "escape" were identified as bridge symptoms. Notably, the correlation between "anhedonia" and "withdrawal" significantly increased, and that between "guilty" and "escape" significantly decreased over time.

Conclusions

This study provides novel insights into the central features of internet addiction and depression during the two stages. Interestingly, "guilty" and "escape," two functions of the defense mechanism, are identified as bridge symptoms. These two symptoms are suggested to activate the negative feedback loop and further contribute to the comorbidity between internet addiction and depression. Thus, targeting interventions on these internalized symptoms may contribute to alleviating the level of comorbidity among college students.

The Impact of COVID-19 Traumatic Stressors on Mental Health: Is COVID-19 a New Trauma Type

COVID-19 is a new type of trauma that has never been conceptually or empirically analyzed in our discipline. This study aimed to investigate the impact of COVID-19 as traumatic stress on mental health after controlling for individuals' previous stressors and traumas. We utilized a sample of (N = 1374) adults from seven Arab countries. We used an anonymous online questionnaire that included measures for COVID-19 traumatic stress, posttraumatic stress disorder, anxiety, depression, and cumulative stressors and traumas. We conducted hierarchical multiple regression, with posttraumatic stress disorder, depression, and anxiety as dependent variables. In the first step, in each analysis, we entered the country, gender, age, religion, education, and income as independent variables (Kira, Traumatology 7(2):73-86, 2001; Kira, Torture, 14:38-44, 2004; Kira, Traumatology, 2021, https://doi.org/10.1037/trm0000305). In the second step, we entered cumulative stressors and traumas as an independent variable. In the third step, we entered either COVID-19 traumatic stressors or one of its subtypes (fears of infection, economic, and lockdown) as an independent variable. Finally, we conducted structural equation modeling with PTSD, depression, and anxiety as predictors of the latent variable mental health and COVID-19 as the independent variable. Results indicated that COVID-19 traumatic stressors, and each of its three subtypes, were unique predictors of PTSD, anxiety, and depression. Thus, COVID-19 is a new type of traumatic stress that has serious mental health effects.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11469-021-00577-0.

Prevalence of Depression and Related Factors among Patients with Chronic Disease during the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

The management of chronic diseases in the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic is especially challenging, and reducing potential psychological harm is essential. This review aims to determine the prevalence of depression during the COVID-19 pandemic in patients with chronic disease, and to characterize the impacts of related factors. A systematic review was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. The meta-analysis was performed using StatsDirect software. The review identified 33 articles with a total of 50,905 patients with chronic diseases. Four meta-analyses were performed to estimate the prevalence of depression. In diabetic patients, the prevalence ranged from 17% (95% CI = 7-31) (PHQ-9) to 33% (95% CI = 16-51) (PHQ-8); in obese patients, the prevalence was 48% (95% CI = 26-71); and in hypertensive patients, the prevalence was 18% (95% CI = 13-24). The factors significantly associated with depression were female sex, being single, deterioration in the clinical parameters of diabetes, a decrease in self-care behavior, reduced physical activity and sleep time and fear of contagion. The COVID-19 pandemic has significantly increased levels of depression among persons with chronic disease. Pandemics and other emergency events have a major impact on mental health, so early psychological interventions and health management policies are needed to reinforce chronic patients' physical and mental health.

A nationally representative dataset of 1,549 Americans aged 18 to 94 on interest in, experience with, and barriers to cogeneration, defined as working with older and younger people for social good

This dataset focuses on Americans' interest in, experience with, and perceived barriers to working with members of other generations to improve the world around them. It includes responses from a March 2022 survey of 1,549 people between the ages of 18 and 94 who lived in the U.S. using the NORC at the University of Chicago AmeriSpeak® Panel. To increase the representativeness of the sample, the survey was offered both online and by phone. The sample is drawn from a probability-based panel designed to be representative of the U.S. household population. Questions focused on respondents' efforts (paid or volunteer) to improve the world around them, with a particular focus on cogenerational work with people at least 25 years older and younger than themselves. Respondents answered questions about their interest in and experience with cogenerational work as well as perceived barriers to it. Respondents were also asked to identify specific issues that they would like to work on with people of different generations (e.g., mental health, education, environment), their beliefs on if and how younger and older people working together might reduce divisions in society, and their engagement with people of different generations outside of their families. The complete dataset with 189 variables (10 of which are string/text variables from open-ended responses) is available both as a Stata .do file as well as in two .csv files. Two codebooks (one simplified, one full) and a project report from NORC that details the dataset's weighting and other methodological information are also available. This point-in-time dataset can be used for univariate, bivariate, and multivariate analysis and may be useful to researchers, social sector leaders, and policymakers interested in multigenerational efforts to solve social problems.

"Life is hard": How the COVID-19 pandemic affected daily stressors of women

The COVID-19 pandemic radically and rapidly altered Americans' daily life as they navigated quarantines, school closings, job insecurity, and disrupted social activities. The COVID-19 pandemic has disproportionately affected women who have reported higher levels of stress, anxiety, and depression related to the pandemic compared to men. The study explored how the COVID-19 pandemic affected daily stressors of women. Qualitative and quantitative data were collected simultaneously using an online questionnaire from female participants (N = 531) who were 18 years of age or older and residing, employed, or accessing health care in Arkansas. A qualitative descriptive approach was used to summarize and synthesize participants' experiences and perceptions. Qualitative data allowed respondents to describe their lived experiences of how the COVID-19 pandemic affected them from their perspective. Four primary themes related to participants' experiences of stress related to the COVID-19 outbreak are reported: 1) employment and expenses, 2) social distancing, 3) caregiving, and 4) emotional/mental health. Several subthemes emerged within primary themes. The study documented respondents' lived experiences and how COVID-19 stress increased anxiety, depression, fear, and frustration. These findings contribute important nuances about women's experiences of stress caused by COVID-19 and can inform future health policies to address women's health post-pandemic and in future health crises. This study makes a significant contribution to the literature as the first article that uses qualitative methods to document sources of COVID-19 pandemic stress for women in their own words.

The impact of two types of COVID-19-related discrimination and contemporaneous stressors on Chinese immigrants in the US South

The global rise of the COVID-19 pandemic has been accompanied by an increase in anti-Asian discrimination with potentially deleterious effects on individuals of Asian descent. In the present study, we examine how two types of COVID-19-related anti-Asian discrimination and other contemporaneous stressors independently contribute to perceptions of stress in a population-representative sample of Chinese immigrants in North Carolina, as well as the moderating role of ethnic identity on the association between COVID-related discrimination and stress. Analyses rely on data collected among participants ages 18+ in the Chinese Immigrants in Raleigh-Durham (ChIRDU) study who completed surveys in 2018 and during the COVID-19 pandemic (July-September 2020). We utilize ordinary least squares regressions to examine associations of two types of COVID-related discrimination (measured by changes in perceptions of being feared by others and racism-related vigilance) and contemporaneous stressors (measured by general COVID-19-related stressors and acculturative stressors) with perceptions of stress by respondents' pre-pandemic reports of ethnic identity. Controlling for sociodemographic predictors and other stressors, racism-related vigilance is significantly associated with higher perceived stress for Chinese immigrants who identify as completely Chinese. For those who identify as at least partly American, new perceptions of being feared by others during the pandemic are significantly associated with higher perceived stress. Acculturative and COVID-related stressors are independently associated with higher perceived stress for both groups. These results suggest that COVID-related anti-Asian discrimination aggravates the psychological burden of multiple stressors in Chinese immigrants' lives by uniquely contributing to perceptions of stress alongside contemporaneous stressors. The results also highlight the heterogeneous mental health needs of Chinese immigrants and hold important implications for intervention development in the community studied here as well as in other Chinese communities in the US.

Teachers’ demographic and occupational attributes predict feelings of hopelessness during the COVID-19 pandemic

The outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in many emotional consequences for teachers, including feelings of isolation, loneliness, and hopelessness. However, evidence on the prevalence of hopelessness and the associated factors in teachers during the pandemic is limited. The purpose of this research was to examine the prevalence of hopelessness in public school teachers and identify risk factors associated with it. A sample of 168 teachers aged 25–49 years participated in the study by completing the Socio-Demographic Questionnaire, the Beck Hopelessness Scale (BHS), and the Multi-Dimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support (MSPSS). The results revealed a moderate level of experienced hopelessness in teachers. Hopelessness prevalence was also significantly different across teacher gender (males = 79%), age groups (&gt;40 = 77%), socioeconomic status (poor socioeconomic status = 70%), educational level (high school teachers = 79%), professional experience (experienced teachers = 82%), and perceived social support (low perceived social support = 79%). The results of a logistic regression analysis confirmed the effects of these demographic and occupational attributes on hopelessness by explaining ~71% of the variance in hopelessness feelings. Higher odds ratios were associated with age, socioeconomic status, and perceived social support, signifying the prominence of these factors in predicting hopelessness. The study contributes to identifying and screening teachers at risk of hopelessness in public schools and recommends promoting collegial/superior support as well as a positive school climate as the protective factors against hopelessness.

Salivary mental stress biomarkers in COVID-19 patients

BACKGROUND

During the COVID-19 pandemic, mental health disorders and level of stress show a major increase compared to before the pandemic. Coronavirus-related stress is recently the leading cause of negative impacts on global mental health. Thus, maintaining positive mental health is as important as maintaining physical health during COVID-19. The aim of this study was to analyze salivary mental stress biomarkers as cortisol, alpha-amylase, and chromogranin A in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 to compare their potential relationship with stress symptoms.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A total of 80 adult hospitalized patients with moderate COVID-19 disease and a control group (n = 80) randomly selected were conducted as participants. Saliva cortisol (sCort), saliva alpha-amylase (sAA), and saliva and chromogranin A (sCgA) were determined by the ELISA method (Bio Vendor, USA). Symptoms of stress were measured with a stress symptom checklist (SSCL).

RESULTS

The patients group presented significantly higher levels of sCort, sAA, and sCgA compared with the control group. The correlation analysis showed a positive correlation with strong strength between sCort and sAA (r = 0.934, p < 0.01), as well as sAA with sCgA (r = 0.714, p < 0.01). A moderate positive correlation was found between sCort with sCgA (r = 0.618, p < 0.05). Based on their stress scores from the SSCL the patients were associated with high stress level (30.00%) and very high stress levels (67.5%). In terms of the controls, all the participants showed a low to moderate stress level. We found significant positive correlation between levels of stress and salivary biomarkers.

CONCLUSION

Data from our study demonstrated that salivary biomarkers are promising tools of exploring COVID-19 related stress.

Possible substance use disorders among first responders during the COVID-19 era: a quasi-experimental study of personal and residential vulnerability

Background: During the COVID-19 pandemic possible substance use disorders (SUD) were exacerbated from increased stress and isolation. Experiences of symptomology differ widely by occupations.Objectives: The objectives were to determine if there is a temporal relationship between COVID-19 vulnerability and possible SUDs among first responders, and to examine the association with neighborhood vulnerability.Methods: We conducted an analysis with two distinct cohorts dependent on time of entry: 1) First responders that began counseling prior to COVID-19 and 2) First responders that began counseling after the start of COVID-19. Data were collected at intake from first responders seeking mental health services between 2017 and 2021 at an organization in Dallas/Fort Worth, Texas. The study sample included 195 mostly male (75%) first responders (51% law enforcement officers; 49% emergency medical technicians/firefighters). Bivariate models tested unadjusted relationships between covariates and possible SUD. Adjusted models consisted of a two-level multivariable logistic regression models.Results: Nearly 40% (n = 77) screened positive for a possible SUD. Those beginning counseling after COVID-19 did not have higher odds of SUDs. For every unit increase in neighborhood Severe COVID-19 Health Risk Index at a first responder's residential location there was an increase in the odds of a possible SUD (AOR = 3.14, 95% CI: 1.47, 6.75).Conclusions: Our study highlights the degree to which personal and residential vulnerability to COVID-19 impacted first responders. The increased occupational stress of this population, and an established pattern of maladaptive coping, elucidates the need for preventative and clinical approaches to strengthen the resilience of this population.

The Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic and Associated Control Measures on the Mental Health of the General Population : A Systematic Review and Dose-Response Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

To what extent the COVID-19 pandemic and its containment measures influenced mental health in the general population is still unclear.

PURPOSE

To assess the trajectory of mental health symptoms during the first year of the pandemic and examine dose-response relations with characteristics of the pandemic and its containment.

DATA SOURCES

Relevant articles were identified from the living evidence database of the COVID-19 Open Access Project, which indexes COVID-19-related publications from MEDLINE via PubMed, Embase via Ovid, and PsycInfo. Preprint publications were not considered.

STUDY SELECTION

Longitudinal studies that reported data on the general population's mental health using validated scales and that were published before 31 March 2021 were eligible.

DATA EXTRACTION

An international crowd of 109 trained reviewers screened references and extracted study characteristics, participant characteristics, and symptom scores at each timepoint. Data were also included for the following country-specific variables: days since the first case of SARS-CoV-2 infection, the stringency of governmental containment measures, and the cumulative numbers of cases and deaths.

DATA SYNTHESIS

In a total of 43 studies (331 628 participants), changes in symptoms of psychological distress, sleep disturbances, and mental well-being varied substantially across studies. On average, depression and anxiety symptoms worsened in the first 2 months of the pandemic (standardized mean difference at 60 days, -0.39 [95% credible interval, -0.76 to -0.03]); thereafter, the trajectories were heterogeneous. There was a linear association of worsening depression and anxiety with increasing numbers of reported cases of SARS-CoV-2 infection and increasing stringency in governmental measures. Gender, age, country, deprivation, inequalities, risk of bias, and study design did not modify these associations.

LIMITATIONS

The certainty of the evidence was low because of the high risk of bias in included studies and the large amount of heterogeneity. Stringency measures and surges in cases were strongly correlated and changed over time. The observed associations should not be interpreted as causal relationships.

CONCLUSION

Although an initial increase in average symptoms of depression and anxiety and an association between higher numbers of reported cases and more stringent measures were found, changes in mental health symptoms varied substantially across studies after the first 2 months of the pandemic. This suggests that different populations responded differently to the psychological stress generated by the pandemic and its containment measures.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE

Swiss National Science Foundation. (PROSPERO: CRD42020180049).

Which Anxious Adolescents Were Most Affected by the COVID-19 Pandemic?

Although the COVID-19 pandemic caused significant stress and anxiety among many, individuals' experiences varied. We examined if specific forms of anxiety predicted distinct trajectories of anxiety, perceived stress, and COVID-related worries during three early months of the pandemic. In a longitudinal study (N = 291), adolescents' (n = 194) social and generalized anxiety levels were assessed via parent- and self-reports and clinical diagnostic interviews. In young adulthood (n = 164), anxiety, stress, and COVID-related worries were assessed thrice during the pandemic. Pre-pandemic generalized anxiety predicted higher initial levels and maintenance of anxiety, stress, and COVID-related worries during the pandemic. In contrast, pre-pandemic social anxiety predicted lower initial levels of anxiety, stress, and COVID-related worries, but this initial effect on anxiety and stress was offset over time by social anxiety's positive effect on the slope. Our results highlight the importance of understanding how pre-pandemic factors influence individuals' experiences during the pandemic.

Acute stress, worry, and impairment in health care and non-health care essential workers during the COVID-19 pandemic

OBJECTIVE

Health care and non-health care essential workers working in face-to-face interactions during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic may be vulnerable to psychosocial distress. Limited empirical research on COVID-19-related psychosocial outcomes has utilized probability-based samples including both health care and non-health care essential workers.

METHOD

We surveyed a sample of 1,821 United States self-identified essential workers, collected using probability-based methods, working in face-to-face interactions during the early phase of the COVID-19 outbreak (March 18, 2020 through April 18, 2020), in three consecutive 10-day cohorts. We assessed acute stress, health-related worries, and functional impairment. Demographics, secondary stressors (lack of childcare or health care, lost wages), and pre-COVID-19 mental and physical health were examined as predictors of psychological outcomes.

RESULTS

Acute stress (β = .08, p = .001), health-related worries (β = .09, p = .001), and functional impairment (β = .05, p = .034) increased over time in the early weeks of the outbreak. Health care essential workers reported lower functional impairment (β = -.06, p = .009) and acute stress (β = -.06, p = .015) compared with non-health care essential workers. Across the sample, prior mental and physical health ailments, inability to obtain health care, lost wages, younger age, female gender, and Hispanic ethnicity were associated with acute stress (βs = -.14 to .15, ps ≤ .001), health-related worries (βs = -.09 to .14, ps ≤ .001), and functional impairment (βs = -.08 to .16, ps ≤ .006). Lack of childcare (β = .09, p < .001) was positively associated with acute stress.

CONCLUSION

Non-health care essential workers may be vulnerable to negative psychosocial outcomes. Targeted training and support may help facilitate coping with the effects of working in-person during the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. Findings may help inform intervention efforts, critical as COVID-19 becomes endemic and society must learn to live with its evolving variants. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

Psychological responses to U.S. statewide restrictions and COVID-19 exposures: A longitudinal study

OBJECTIVE

The COVID-19 pandemic has generated debate as to whether community-level behavioral restrictions are worth the emotional costs of such restrictions. Using a longitudinal design, we juxtaposed the relative impacts of state-level restrictions and case counts with person-level direct and media-based exposures on distress, loneliness, and traumatic stress symptoms (TSS) during the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States.

METHOD

From March 18, 2020 to April 18, 2020 and September 9, 2020 to October 16, 2020, a representative probability sample of U.S. adults (N = 5,594) completed surveys of their psychological responses and personal direct and media-based exposures to the COVID-19 pandemic. Survey data were merged with publicly available data on the stringency of state-level mitigation policies (e.g., school/business closures) during this period and longitudinal case/death counts for each state.

RESULTS

Three multilevel models (outcomes: distress, loneliness, TSS) were constructed. Measurements of dependent variables (Level 1) were nested within respondents (Level 2) who were nested within states (Level 3). State-level mitigation, cases, or deaths were not associated with any dependent variables (all p's > .05). However, person-level exposures, including having contracted COVID-19 oneself (distress b = .22, p < .001; loneliness b = .13, p = .03; TSS b = .18, p = .001), knowing others who were sick (distress b = .04, p < .001; loneliness b = .02, p < .001; TSS b = .05, p < .001) or died (distress b = .10, p = .001; loneliness b = .10, p = .003; TSS b = .16, p < .001), and exposure to pandemic-related media (distress b = .12, p < .001; loneliness b = .09, p < .001; TSS b = .16, p < .001), were positively associated with outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Personal exposures to COVID-19 are more strongly associated with psychological outcomes than statewide mitigations levied to stop disease spread. Results may inform public health response planning for future disease outbreaks. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

Conspiracy mentality among informal caregivers as a risk factor for caregiver burden, mental health, perceived loneliness and social isolation during the COVID-19 pandemic: findings of a representative online study from Germany

PURPOSE

This study aims to analyze if and how conspiracy mentality is associated with mental health, burden and perceived social isolation and loneliness of informal caregivers of older individuals with care needs.

METHODS

A quantitative, cross-sectional study was conducted. Participants had to be at least 40 years of age and were drawn randomly from the German online panel forsa.omninet and questioned between the 4th and 19th of March 2021. A sample of 489 informal caregivers (relatives and non-relatives supporting individuals aged ≥ 60 years) was questioned. Conspiracy mentality, depressive symptoms, loneliness and social exclusion were measured with validated instruments (e.g., The Conspiracy Mentality Questionnaire). Questions referred to the last three months prior to assessment. Multiple linear regression analyses, adjusted for sociodemographic, economic and health factors and indicators of the pandemic, were conducted.

RESULTS

Findings indicate a significant positive association between conspiracy mentality and caregiver burden, loneliness, social exclusion, and depressive symptoms. No gender differences were found for any outcome.

CONCLUSIONS

The results indicate that conspiracy mentality could be a risk factor for mental health, perceived social isolation and loneliness, and contribute to increased caregiver burden among informal caregivers of older care recipients during the COVID-19 pandemic. Accordingly, informal caregivers could benefit from actions focused on reducing conspiracy mentality during a health crisis, which could improve psychosocial health and wellbeing in this vulnerable group.