COVID-19 has infected millions of people and upended the lives of most humans on the planet. Researchers from across the psychological sciences have sought to document and investigate the impact of COVID-19 in myriad ways, causing an explosion of research that is broad in scope, varied in methods, and challenging to consolidate. Because policy and practice aimed at helping people live healthier and happier lives requires insight from robust patterns of evidence, this article provides a rapid and thorough summary of high-quality studies available through early 2021 examining the mental-health consequences of living through the COVID-19 pandemic. Our review of the evidence indicates that anxiety, depression, and distress increased in the early months of the pandemic. Meanwhile, suicide rates, life satisfaction, and loneliness remained largely stable throughout the first year of the pandemic. In response to these insights, we present seven recommendations (one urgent, two short-term, and four ongoing) to support mental health during the pandemic and beyond.
The Lancet COVID-19 Commission was launched on July 9, 2020, to assist governments, civil society, and UN institutions in responding effectively to the COVID-19 pandemic. The Commission aims to offer practical solutions to the four main global challenges posed by the pandemic: suppressing the pandemic by means of pharmaceutical and non-pharmaceutical interventions; overcoming humanitarian emergencies, including poverty, hunger, and mental distress, caused by the pandemic; restructuring public and private finances in the wake of the pandemic; and rebuilding the world economy in an inclusive, resilient, and sustainable way that is aligned with the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and the Paris Climate Agreement. Many creative solutions are already being implemented, and a key aim of the Commission is to accelerate their adoption worldwide.
The COVID-19 pandemic is unprecedented. The pandemic not only induced a public health crisis, but has led to severe economic, social, and educational crises. Across economies and societies, the distributional consequences of the pandemic have been uneven. Among groups living in vulnerable conditions, the pandemic substantially magnified the inequality gaps, with possible negative implications for these individuals' long-term physical, socioeconomic, and mental wellbeing. This Viewpoint proposes priority, programmatic, and policy recommendations that governments, resource partners, and relevant stakeholders should consider in formulating medium-term to long-term strategies for preventing the spread of COVID-19, addressing the virus's impacts, and decreasing health inequalities. The world is at a never more crucial moment, requiring collaboration and cooperation from all sectors to mitigate the inequality gaps and improve people's health and wellbeing with universal health coverage and social protection, in addition to implementation of the health in all policies approach.
BackgroundPrelacteal feeding (PLF) is a barrier to exclusive breast feeding.ObjectiveTo determine factors associated with PLF in rural and urban Nigeria.MethodsWe utilized data from the 2013 Nigerian Demographic and Health Survey. Bivariate and multivariate analyses were used to test for association between PLF and related factors.ResultsPrevalence of PLF in urban Nigeria was 49.8%, while in rural Nigeria it was 66.4%. Sugar or glucose water was given more in urban Nigeria (9.7% vs 2.9%), plain water was given more in rural Nigeria (59.9% vs 40.8%). The multivariate analysis revealed that urban and rural Nigeria shared similarities with respect to factors like mother's education, place of delivery, and size of child at birth being significant predictors of PLF. Mode of delivery and type of birth were significant predictors of PLF only in urban Nigeria, whereas, mother's age at birth was a significant predictor of PLF only in rural Nigeria. Zones also showed variations in the odds of PLF according to place of residence.ConclusionInterventions aimed at decreasing PLF rate should be through a tailored approach, and should target at risk sub-groups based on place of residence.
BackgroundThe aim of this longitudinal study was to analyze whether mean Body Mass Index (BMI), assessed at four occasions, changed within different age groups and birth cohorts over time, i.e., between 1980/81 and 2004/05, after adjustment for possible confounders.MethodsA sample of 2728 men and 2770 women aged 16–71 years at study start were randomly drawn from the Swedish Total Population Register and followed from 1980/81 to 2004/05. The same sample was assessed on four occasions during the 24-year study period (i.e., every eighth year). The outcome variable, BMI, was based on self-reported height and weight. A mixed model, with random intercept and random slope, was used to estimate annual changes in BMI within the different age groups and birth cohorts.ResultsMean BMI increased from 24.1 to 25.5 for men and from 23.1 to 24.3 for women during the 24-year study period. The annual change by age group was highest in the ages of 32–39, 40–47 and 48–55 years among men, and in the ages of 24–31, 32–39, and 40–47 years among women. The highest annual changes were found in the youngest birth cohorts for both men and women, i.e., those born 1958–65, 1966–73, and 1974–81. For each birth cohort, the annual change in BMI increased compared to the previous, i.e., older, birth cohort. In addition, age-by-cohort interaction tests revealed that the increase in BMI by increasing age was higher in the younger birth cohorts (1966–1989) than in the older ones.ConclusionsPublic health policies should target those age groups and birth cohorts with the highest increases in BMI. For example, younger birth cohorts had higher annual increases in BMI than older birth cohorts, which means that younger cohorts increased their BMI more than older ones during the study period.
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.