Back

Shocked-relaxed-tired: Mental health during the three waves of the Covid-19

Novotny, J. S.; Gonzalez Rivas, J. P.; Kunzova, S.; Skladana, M.; Pospisilova, A.; Polcrova, A.; Vassilaki, M.; Medina Inojosa, J. R.; Lopez-Jimenez, F.; Geda, Y. E.; Stokin, G. B.

2021-07-25 public and global health
10.1101/2021.07.25.21261094 medRxiv
Show abstract

BackgroundAlthough several studies documented the impact of COVID-19 on mental health, the long-term effects of COVID-19 on mental health remain unclear. AimsTo examine longitudinal changes in mental health prior to and during the consecutive COVID-19 waves in a well-established probability sample. MethodAn online survey was completed by the participants of the COVID-19 add-on study at 4 timepoints (N1=1823, N2=788, N3=532, N4=383): pre-COVID period (2014/2015), 1st COVID-19 wave (April-May, 2020), 2nd COVID-19 wave (August-October, 2020) and 3rd COVID-19 wave (March-April, 2021). Data were collected via a set of validated instruments and analysed using latent growth models. ResultsDuring the pandemic, we observed a significant increase in stress levels (slope=1.127, P<0.001) and depressive symptoms (slope=1.177, P<0.001). The rate of increase in stress levels (cov=2.167, P=0.002), but not in depressive symptoms (cov=0.558, P=0.10), was associated with the pre-pandemic mental health status of the participants. Further analysis revealed two opposing clusters of factors that influenced mental health: loneliness and COVID-19 showed a negative effect on emotionality, while higher resilience acted protectively. A greater increase in stress was observed in women and younger participants. ConclusionsThe surge in stress levels and depressive symptoms persisted across all three consecutive COVID-19 waves. This surge is attributable to the effect of several risk factors including the status of mental health prior to the COVID-19 pandemic. Our findings have implications for strategies promoting resilience and addressing loneliness to mitigate the mental health impact of COVID-19 pandemic.

Matching journals

The top 9 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.