No abstract

Highlights During the lockdown. Two thirds of university students reported at least ‘much’ increase in anxiety. One third in depressive feelings and. 2.59% an increase in suicidal thoughts. Major depression was present in 12.43%. Severe distress was present in 13.46%. Risk factors were:. Female sex. History of self-injury. History of suicidal attempts. Following studies of law, literature, pedagogics, political sciences and related studies as well as technical but not health sciences. Beliefs in conspiracy theories. Enjoyed acceptance ranging from 20 to 68%. Students of law, literature, pedagogics, political sciences and related studies manifested higher acceptance rates.

Introduction There are few published empirical data on the effects of COVID‐19 on mental health, and until now, there is no large international study. Material and methods During the COVID-19 pandemic, an online questionnaire gathered data from 55,589 participants from 40 countries (64.85% females aged 35.80 ± 13.61; 34.05% males aged 34.90±13.29 and 1.10% other aged 31.64±13.15). Distress and probable depression were identified with the use of a previously developed cut-off and algorithm respectively. Statistical analysis Descriptive statistics were calculated. Chi-square tests, multiple forward stepwise linear regression analyses and Factorial Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) tested relations among variables. Results Probable depression was detected in 17.80% and distress in 16.71%. A significant percentage reported a deterioration in mental state, family dynamics and everyday lifestyle. Persons with a history of mental disorders had higher rates of current depression (31.82% vs. 13.07%). At least half of participants were accepting (at least to a moderate degree) a non-bizarre conspiracy. The highest Relative Risk (RR) to develop depression was associated with history of Bipolar disorder and self-harm/attempts (RR = 5.88). Suicidality was not increased in persons without a history of any mental disorder. Based on these results a model was developed. Conclusions The final model revealed multiple vulnerabilities and an interplay leading from simple anxiety to probable depression and suicidality through distress. This could be of practical utility since many of these factors are modifiable. Future research and interventions should specifically focus on them.

No abstract

Aims: We aimed to identify the prevalence of anxiety, depression, and suicidality and identify relevant risk and protecting factors among university students during the COVID-19 pandemic in Georgia. Materials and methods: We conducted an anonymous online survey ( n = 984, convenience sample by approaching all universities in Georgia and some student organizations) using valid instruments (e.g., STAI to assess anxiety, CES-D for depression, and RASS to assess suicidality). We calculated frequencies and prevalence and applied regression analysis and Chi-square tests to identify risk and protecting factors. Findings: Respondents’ mental health had been significantly affected (with a high prevalence of depression (46.7%) and anxiety (79%)) during the pandemic (which coincided with political turmoil and caused an economic crisis) in Georgia. Some of the critical factors affecting mental health were: female sex ( p = .000), bad general health condition (anxiety p = .001, depression p = .004), finances (anxiety and depression p < .001), reduced physical activity (anxiety p < .001, depression p = .014), and a history of self-harming (suicidality p < .001). Less family conflicts (anxiety and depression p < .05), absence of nightmares (anxiety and depression p < .001), moderate or low fears of COVID-19 (anxiety p < .001), and lower substance use (anxiety p = .023) were among the potentially protective factors. International students coped better, despite vulnerability. Medical students had a lower risk of depression. Conclusions: In the complex socioeconomic context, mental health of students in Georgia suffered a lot during the COVID-19 pandemic, requiring thorough planning and delivery of student support services in higher educational institutions during and after the pandemic.

Introduction The current study aimed to investigate the rates of anxiety, clinical depression, and suicidality and their changes in health professionals during the COVID-19 outbreak. Extended author information available on the last page of the article Materials and methodsThe data came from the larger COMET-G study. The study sample includes 12,792 health professionals from 40 countries (62.40% women aged 39.76 ± 11.70; 36.81% men aged 35.91 ± 11.00 and 0.78% non-binary gender aged 35.15 ± 13.03). Distress and clinical depression were identified with the use of a previously developed cut-off and algorithm, respectively. Statistical analysis Descriptive statistics were calculated. Chi-square tests, multiple forward stepwise linear regression analyses, and Factorial Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) tested relations among variables. Results Clinical depression was detected in 13.16% with male doctors and 'non-binary genders' having the lowest rates (7.89 and 5.88% respectively) and 'non-binary gender' nurses and administrative staff had the highest (37.50%); distress was present in 15.19%. A significant percentage reported a deterioration in mental state, family dynamics, and everyday lifestyle. Persons with a history of mental disorders had higher rates of current depression (24.64% vs. 9.62%; p < 0.0001). Suicidal tendencies were at least doubled in terms of RASS scores. Approximately one-third of participants were accepting (at least to a moderate degree) a non-bizarre conspiracy. The highest Relative Risk (RR) to develop clinical depression was associated with a history of Bipolar disorder (RR = 4.23). Conclusions The current study reported findings in health care professionals similar in magnitude and quality to those reported earlier in the general population although rates of clinical depression, suicidal tendencies, and adherence to conspiracy theories were much lower. However, the general model of factors interplay seems to be the same and this could be of practical utility since many of these factors are modifiable.

Objectives: To determine the prevalence of depression and the sociodemographic factors associated with depression in Malaysia during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: This study is part of the COVID-19 Mental Health International Study to collect data on the impact of the pandemic on mental health through an online survey. People who were aged ≥18 years, able to read Malay or English, had access to the internet, and consented to participate were asked to complete a pro forma questionnaire to collect their sociodemographic data. The presence of distress and depression was assessed using the English or Malay version of the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale. Results: Of 963 participants, 451 (46.8%) had depression and 512 (53.2%) had no depression who were either normal (n = 169, 17.5%) or had distress (n = 343, 35.6%). Participants had higher odds of having depression when living with two people (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 3.896, p = 0.001), three people (AOR = 2.622, p < 0.001) or four people (AOR = 3.135, p < 0.001). Participants with three children had higher odds of having depression (AOR = 2.084, p = 0.008), whereas having only one child was a protective factor for depression (AOR = 0.481, p = 0.01). Participants had higher odds of having depression when self-employed (AOR = 3.825, p = 0.003), retired (AOR = 4.526, p = 0.001), being housekeeper (AOR = 7.478, p = 0.004), not working by choice (AOR = 5.511, p < 0.001), or unemployed (AOR = 3.883, p = 0.009). Participants had higher odds of depression when living in a small town (AOR = 3.193, p < 0.001) or rural area (AOR = 3.467, p < 0.001). Participants with no chronic medical illness had lower odds of having depression (AOR = 0.589, p = 0.008). Conclusion:In Malaysia during the COVID-19 pandemic, people who are living with two, three, or four people, having three children, living in a small town or rural areas, and having unstable income have higher odds of having depression. Urgent intervention for those at risk of depression is recommended.

No abstract