Purpose of reviewIn this article, we outline an up-to-date overview of the climate change impact on mental health of urban population, conducted by searching the PubMed database for relevant studies published in the past 12–18 months, in English.Recent findingsClimate change is part of a larger systemic ecological problem in which human demands are exceeding the regenerative capacity of the biosphere. We are witnessing a ‘climate chaos’, a phase of instability and transformation, which is leading humans into a psychological condition of ‘systemic insecurity’ and a shared feeling of uncertainty. Currently, one of the places where our species is particularly exposed to climate change are cities, due to build-up in urban infrastructure, rapid and chaotic urbanization, high densities and recent rapid growth, social inequality, and ‘heat island effect’.The impact of climate change on cities exposes vulnerable groups to the worse mental health consequences. These groups include the homelessness, slum dwellers for whom the ‘neighbourhood effects’ are being discussed, climate refugees and migrants, young people, and finally those who assist these people.SummaryIn order to realize broader mental health prevention in cities exposed to climate change phenomena, public health approaches are needed. Institutions must avoid reinforcing inequalities among the more vulnerable groups or create new inequalities.
Climate change can have various psychopathological manifestations which have been more actively addressed by scientific research only in recent years. Indeed, extreme weather events and environmental changes have been shown to be associated with a range of mental health problems. Following the destruction of ecosystems, biodiversity loss can cause mental distress and emotional responses, including so-called ‘psychoterratic’ syndromes arising from negatively felt and perceived environmental change. Studies investigating relationships between biodiversity and mental health reveal a complex landscape of scientific evidence, calling for a better understanding of this challenging issue.
BACKGROUND The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic impacted in a still undefined way pregnant women’s mental health. There are reports of mood and affect changes in the general population and the suggestion that similar changes occur also in the pregnant population. The greater vulnerability of women during the COVID-19 restriction period may translate into a greater risk for mental disorders in the gestational period. We hypothesised that pregnant women in the pre-pandemic period would have less psychopathology and more psychological support than pregnant women during the pandemic restriction period. AIM To compare pregnant women for anxiety, prenatal depression, psychopathology, and social support before and after the awareness of the pandemic. METHODS We administered to women willing to participate in their 2 nd -3 rd trimesters of pregnancy the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS), the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory Form Y (STAI-Y), and the Symptom CheckList-90-Revised (SCL-90R); we further collected sociodemographic variables and explored women’s social support. The comparison was cross-sectional. The first sample was termed nonCOVID-19 because data were gathered before the COVID-19 outbreak (January 2020-February 2020) was declared, and the second sample termed COVID-19 because participants were already subjected to the COVID-19–related restrictive measures (January 2021-February 2021). Since normal distribution was not met (Shapiro-Wilk test applied), we applied nonparametric Mann-Whitney’s U -test to compare psychometric tests. Ethical standards were met. RESULTS The nonCOVID-19 group reported higher support from partners only, while the COVID-19 group reported multiple support ( χ 2 = 9.7181; P = 0.021); the nonCOVID-19 group scored higher than the COVID-19 group only on state anxiety among psychometric scales [STAI-Y1, nonCOVID-19 median = 39 (95%CI: 39.19-51.10) vs COVID-19 median= 32 (95%CI: 30.83-38.90); Mann-Whitney’s U =117.5, P = 0.00596]. Other measures did not differ meaningfully between the two groups. Scores on the EPDS, the state and trait subscales of the STAI-Y, and most SCL-90R subscales inter-correlated with one another. The anxiety component of the EPDS, EPDS-3A, correlated poorly with other measures, while it was the Global Symptom Index of the SCL-90-R that correlated most strongly with most measures. Our results are at odds with most literature and do not confirm increased depression and anxiety rates in pregnant women during the pandemic. CONCLUSION The ability of pregnant women to deal with novel generalised threats involves mobilization of inner resources. Increasing sources of social support may have produced...
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.