There is increasing knowledge that the COVID-19 pandemic has had an impact on mental health of children and young people. However, the global evidence of mental health changes before compared to during the COVID-19 pandemic focusing on children and young people has not been systematically reviewed. This systematic review examined longitudinal and repeated cross-sectional studies comparing before and during COVID-19 pandemic data to determine whether the mental health of children and young people had changed before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. The Web of Science, PubMed, Embase and PsycINFO databases were searched to identify peer-reviewed studies that had been published in English and focused on children and young people between 0 and 24 years of age. This identified 21 studies from 11 countries, covering more than 96,000 subjects from 3 to 24 years of age. Pre-pandemic and pandemic data were compared. Most studies reported longitudinal deterioration in the mental health of adolescents and young people, with increased depression, anxiety and psychological distress after the pandemic started. Other findings included deteriorated negative affect, mental well-being and increased loneliness. Comparing data for pandemic and pre-pandemic periods showed that the COVID-19 pandemic may negatively impact the mental health of children and young people. There is an urgent need for high-quality research to address the impact, risks and protective factors of the pandemic on their mental health, as this will provide a good foundation for dealing with future health emergencies and other crises.

Background and Aims: Malaysia's first Movement Control Order (MCO) or “lockdown” was in place for 6 weeks to curb the spread of coronavirus disease (COVID-19). Consequently, all universities were forced to close temporarily with abrupt changes to teaching and learning activities. However, there has been a lack of consensus regarding students' actual psychological status and mental health during the MCO implementation. This study investigates the link, state, and differences of negative emotional symptoms, happiness, and work-life balance among university students during the COVID-19 pandemic.Methodology: This study recruited 1,005 university students across Malaysia. Data was collected online using Qualtrics to measure negative emotional symptoms (The Depression, Anxiety, and Stress Scale), happiness (The Oxford Happiness Inventory), and work-life balance (Work-Family Conflict Scale). All data was analyzed using SPSS version 25 and AMOS version 26 using T-test, ANOVA, logistic regression analyses, and path analysis method.Findings: Findings indicated that 22, 34.3, and 37.3% of the university students scored moderate to extremely severe levels of stress, anxiety, and depression symptoms, respectively. Half scored rather happy or very happy (50%) for happiness levels. Meanwhile, 50.4 and 39.4% scored high to very high levels of work-to-family and family-to-work conflict. Significant differences in stress, anxiety, depression, happiness, work-family conflict, and family-work conflict were recorded across different demographic factors. Happiness was found to be a protective factor with a lesser likelihood of experiencing severe stress (OR = 0.240, 95% CI: 0.180, 0.321), anxiety (OR = 0.336, 95% CI: 0.273, 0.414), and depression (OR = 0.121, 95% CI: 0.088, 0.165) with higher happiness levels. Higher score of work-to-family conflict contributes to greater odds of having severe levels of anxiety (OR = 1.453, 95% CI: 1.161, 1.818). While greater likelihood of developing severe stress (OR = 1.468, 95% CI: 1.109, 1.943) and severe anxiety (OR = 1.317, 95% CI: 1.059, 1.638) under increasing score of family-to-work conflict. Besides, happiness is found to negatively linked with lower negative emotional symptoms, while work-family conflict and family-work conflict are positively linked with higher negative emotional symptoms.Conclusion: Lockdown implementation during the COVID-19 pandemic appears to have a significant impact on university students' negative emotional symptoms, happiness, and work-life balance. Happiness was found to be a protective factor while the state of work-life balance is a risk factor that can predict students' negative emotional symptoms.

Depression is increasingly being recognised as a significant mental health problem in the workplace contributing to productivity loss and economic burden to organisations. This paper reviews recently published randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of universal and targeted interventions to reduce depression in the workplace. Studies were identified through searches of EMBASE, MEDLINE/PubMed, PsycINFO, PsycARTICLES Full Text, and Global Health and Social Policy and Practice databases. Studies were included if they included an RCT of a workplace intervention for employees targeting depression as the primary outcome. Twenty-two published RCTs investigating interventions utilising various therapeutic approaches were identified. The cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) approach is the most frequently used in the workplace, while interventions that combine different therapeutic approaches showed the most promising results. A universal intervention in the workplace that combines CBT and coping flexibility recorded the highest effect size (d=1.45 at 4 months' follow-up). Most interventions were delivered in group format and showed low attrition rates compared with other delivery formats. Although all studies reviewed were RCTs, the quality of reporting is low. Interventions using different therapeutic approaches with different modes of delivery have been used. Most of these interventions were shown to reduce depression levels among employees in the workplace, particularly those that combine more than one therapeutic approaches.