Previous meta-analyses were conducted during the initial phases of the COVID-19 pandemic, which utilized a smaller pool of data. The current meta-analysis aims to provide additional (and updated) evidence related to the psychological impact among healthcare workers. The search strategy was developed by a medical librarian and bibliographical databases, including Medline, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and Scopus were searched for studies examining the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the psychological health of healthcare workers. Articles were screened by three reviewers. Heterogeneity among studies was assessed by I2 statistic. The random-effects model was utilized to obtain the pooled prevalence. A subgroup analysis by region, gender, quality of study, assessment methods, healthcare profession, and exposure was performed. Publication bias was assessed by Funnel plot and Egger linear regression test. Sixty-five studies met the inclusion criteria and the total sample constituted 79,437 participants. The pooled prevalence of anxiety, depression, stress, post-traumatic stress syndrome, insomnia, psychological distress, and burnout was 34.4%, 31.8%, 40.3%, 11.4%, 27.8%, 46.1%, and 37.4% respectively. The subgroup analysis indicated higher anxiety and depression prevalence among females, nurses, and frontline responders than males, doctors, and second-line healthcare workers. This study highlights the need for designing a targeted intervention to improve resilience and foster post-traumatic growth among frontline responders.

Mental health issues among college students is a leading public health concern, which seems to have been exacerbated during the COVID-19 pandemic. While previous estimates related to psychological burden among college students are available, quantitative synthesis of available data still needs to be performed. Therefore, this meta-analysis endeavors to present collective evidence discussing the psychological impact of COVID-19 among college students. Bibliographical library databases, including Embase, Medline, CINAHL, Scopus, and PsycINFO, were systematically searched for relevant studies. Titles, abstracts, and full articles were screened, and two reviewers extracted data. Heterogeneity was assessed by I2 statistic. The random-effects model was utilized to obtain the pooled estimates of psychological indicators among college students. Location, gender, level of severity, and quality scores were used as moderator variables for subgroup analyses. Funnel plot and Egger linear regression test was used to assess publication bias. Twenty-seven studies constituting 90,879 college students met the inclusion criteria. The results indicated 39.4% anxiety (95% CI: 28.6,51.3; I2 = 99.8%; p-value < 0.0001) and 31.2% depression (95% CI: 19.7,45.6; I2= 99.8%, p < 0.0001) among college students. The pooled prevalence of stress (26.0%), post-traumatic stress disorder (29.8%), and impaired sleep quality (50.5%) were also reported. College students bear a disproportionate burden of mental health problems worldwide, with females having higher anxiety and depression levels than males. This study’s findings underscore the need to develop appropriate public health interventions to address college students’ emotional and psychosocial needs. The policies should be reflective of demographic and socioeconomic differentials.

The emergence of SARS-CoV-2 mutants, waning immunity, and breakthrough infections prompted the use of booster doses of the COVID-19 vaccine to fight against the pandemic. India started booster doses in January 2022 and it is critical to determine the intention of booster dose uptake and its correlates. Therefore, the current cross-sectional study aimed to investigate booster dose acceptability and associated predictors among the Indian population. A convenience sampling technique was utilized to recruit a sample of 687 Indian residents. A 55-item psychometric validated survey tool was used to assess booster dose acceptability, vaccine literacy and vaccine confidence. Univariate, bivariate, and multivariate statistical methods were used to analyze the data. Over 50% of participants reported their willingness to take the booster dose. Among the group not willing to take the booster dose (n = 303, 44.1%), a significantly larger proportion of respondents were unvaccinated with the primary series (12.2% vs. 5.2%, p < 0.001), had an annual income below 2.96 lacs/annum (52.8% vs. 33.1, p < 0.001), were residents of rural areas (38.0% vs. 23.2%, p < 0.001), were not living with vulnerable individuals (78.5% vs. 65.2%, p < 0.001) and did not have family/friends who had tested positive for COVID-19 (54.6% vs. 35.1%, p = 0.001). Demographic, vaccine variables and multi-theory model subscales to predict the initiation of booster dose among hesitant participants were statistically significant, R2 = 0.561, F (26, 244) = 11.978, p < 0.001; adjusted R2 = 0.514. Findings of this study highlight the need to develop evidence-based interventions to promote vaccine uptake, particularly among hard-to-reach communities living in developing countries.

African Americans have been disproportionately vaccinated at lower rates, which warrants the development of theory-based interventions to reduce vaccine hesitancy in this group. The fourth-generation theories, e.g., multi-theory model (MTM) of health behavior change, are vital in developing behavioral interventions. Therefore, the current study aims to determine recent trends in COVID-19 vaccination rates and to test the MTM model in predicting the initiation of COVID-19 vaccines among vaccine-hesitant Blacks. A sample of 428 unvaccinated African Americans were recruited through a web-based survey using a 28-item psychometric valid questionnaire. Chi-square, independent-samples-t-test or Welch’s t test, and Pearson’s correlation tests were utilized for the analyses. Hierarchical regression modelling was performed to determine the increment in variation accounted for through addition of predictors over a set of models. Nearly 48% of unvaccinated Blacks reported being vaccine-hesitant. The vaccine-hesitant group was relatively younger (40.5 years ± 15.8 vs. 46.2 years ± 17.4, p < 0.001), were Republicans (22.1% vs. 10.0%, p < 0.001), lived in the North-East region (26.0% vs. 11.4%, p < 0.001) and had religious affiliations other than Christianity (21.2% vs. 13.6%, p = 0.04). The mean scores of perceived advantages ((9.01 ± 3.10 vs. 7.07 ± 3.60, p < 0.001) and behavioral confidence (8.84 ± 3.76 vs. 5.67 ± 4.09, p < 0.001) were higher among vaccine non-hesitant group as opposed to the hesitant ones. In a final regression model, all MTM constructs) predicted nearly 65% of variance in initiating COVID-19 vaccination behavior among the vaccine-hesitant group (adjusted R2 = 0.649, F = 32.944, p < 0.001). With each unit increment in MTM constructs (e.g., participatory dialogue and behavior confidence), the initiation of COVID-19 vaccination among vaccine-hesitant Blacks increased by 0.106 and 0.166 units, respectively. Based on the findings of this study a m-health educational intervention to promote COVID-19 vaccine uptake behavior among Blacks is proposed.

Objective: This study’s objective was to examine the knowledge, performance in practicing protective behaviors, and risk perception of Coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) among dental students of India. Methods: A web-based cross-sectional survey was conducted from 10–30 August 2020, involving 381 dental students that were enrolled at the Uttaranchal Dental and Medical Research Institute in India. A web-based structured questionnaire assessed the COVID-19 related knowledge, protective behaviors, and risk perception performance. The independent-samples-t and analysis of variance tests were used to analyze the differences in knowledge, protective behaviors, and perception across the groups. Results: Of the dental students surveyed, 83% had adequate knowledge of COVID-19, and nearly 80% followed appropriate practices regarding COVID-19. The COVID-19 related risk perception was higher among females as compared to males. COVID-19 related knowledge was significantly correlated with preventive behaviors (r = 0.18; p < 0·01) and risk perception (r = 0.10; p < 0.05). We found a high score of COVID-19 related knowledge and precautionary behaviors and moderate risk perception among students. Conclusions: Knowledge and protective behaviors towards infectious diseases, such as COVID-19, have clinical applications in developing educational and formal training programs to promote adherence to the infection control practices among dental students. Clinical significance: The findings of this study will inform policymakers to emphasize on effective risk communication. Dental institutions can incorporate infection control modules in the current curriculum, thereby making future dental professionals capable of performing effective infection control management in the clinical settings. This is critical in improving their knowledge of infection control practices to minimize the risk of nosocomial infections.