Mental Health and Psychological Responses During the Coronavirus Disease 2019 Epidemic: A Comparison Between Wuhan and Other Areas in China

Wang, Qunfeng; Feng, Hongliang; Wang, Meiyao; Xie, Yong; Hou, Botong; Lu, Xuanzhen; Liu, Zhenxing; Ouyang, Keni; Zhang, Renwei; Cai, Qi; Xu, Zhipeng; Li, Huagang; Hao, Chao; Yang, Xiaohua; Yan, Hong; Hu, Xiaohua; Liu, Zhigang; Liu, Yumin

doi:10.1097/psy.0000000000000892

Cited by 13 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…There was also a broad geographical and population distribution of included studies. There were 16 studies from Africa [ 14 , 24 , 59 , 68 – 73 , 75 – 79 , 84 , 88 ], 25 studies from Asia [ 22 , 60 , 61 , 64 – 66 , 74 , 80 , 81 , 83 , 86 , 87 , 90 – 95 , 97 – 99 , 101 , 102 , 104 , 105 ], and others were conducted in Europe [ 67 , 89 , 96 ], North America [ 62 , 63 , 85 , 100 , 103 ] and South America [ 82 ]. More than half (27 studies) of the studies were conducted within community populations [ 22 , 60 , 66 , 69 – 72 , 74 , 76 , 79 – 81 , 83 , 85 – 88 , 90 , 91 , 93 , 95 , 99 – 104 ], while others consisted of health care workers (13 studies) [ 60 , 61 , 63 , 64 , 67 , 77 , 78 , 84 , 89 , 92 , 94 , 96 , 105 ] and patients (eight studies) [ ...…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…3 and S5 ). In terms of the education level of participants, as twenty studies [ 14 , 61 , 63 – 65 , 68 – 70 , 72 , 73 , 77 , 84 , 89 , 92 , 94 , 97 , 99 , 100 , 102 , 105 ] did not report educational levels or did not indicate tertiary education proportion, 30 studies were included in this subgroup analysis. We divided the studies into two groups according to the proportion of participants with tertiary education (<50% and ≥50%).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…(3) Would you touch someone who has recovered from Ebola? Wang et al, 2021 [ 102 ] China Cross sectional COVID-19 Enacted stigma 4191 4191 Community population 61.0 62.0 Items: Public discrimination against COVID-19 cases Wei et al, 2020 [ 87 ] China cross sectional COVID-19 Perceived stigma 1344 1344 Community population 60.1 57.4 Items: Reporting makes me feel stigma Yohannes et al, 2020 [ 76 ] Ethiopia Cross sectional COVID-19 Enacted stigma 247 247 Community population 23.5 83.8 Items: I felt that COVID-19 was a stigmatized disease Yu et al, 2020 [ 103 ] United States Cross sectional COVID-19 Perceived stigma 235 235 Community population 47.9 7.6* Items: Experience of discrimination: adapted from the Everyday Discrimination Scale Responses were averaged to indicate the overall experiences of discrimination participants perceived: (1) you are treated with less courtesy or respect than other people; (2) people act as if they think you are dangerous Yu et al, 2021 [ 104 ] China Cross sectional COVID-19 Perceived stigma 23863 23863 Community population 68.1 58.1 Items: Perceived discrimination due to COVID-19 Yufika et al, 2021 [ 105 ] Indonesia Cross sectional COVID-19 Enacted stigma 288 288 Health care workers 65.3 21.9 Scale: A six-item questionnaire [*Note]: S...…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

A systematic review and meta-analysis on the prevalence of stigma in infectious diseases, including COVID-19: a call to action

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Infectious diseases, including COVID-19, are crucial public health issues and may lead to considerable fear among the general public and stigmatization of, and discrimination against, specific populations. This meta-analysis aimed to estimate the pooled prevalence of stigma in infectious disease epidemics. We systematically searched PubMed, PsycINFO, Embase, MEDLINE, Web of Science, and Cochrane databases since inception to June 08, 2021, and reported the prevalence of stigma towards people with infectious diseases including SARS, H1N1, MERS, Zika, Ebola, and COVID-19. A total of 50 eligible articles were included that contributed 51 estimates of prevalence in 92722 participants. The overall pooled prevalence of stigma across all populations was 34% [95% CI: 28−40%], including enacted stigma (36% [95% CI: 28−44%]) and perceived stigma (31% [95% CI: 22−40%]). The prevalence of stigma in patients, community population, and health care workers, was 38% [95% CI: 12− 65%], 36% [95% CI: 28−45%], and 30% [95% CI: 20−40%], respectively. The prevalence of stigma in participants from low- and middle-income countries was 37% [95% CI: 29−45%], which is higher than that from high-income countries (27% [95% CI: 18−36%]) though this difference was not statistically significant. A similar trend of prevalence of stigma was also observed in individuals with lower education (47% [95% CI: 23−71%]) compared to higher education level (33% [95% CI: 23−4%]). These findings indicate that stigma is a significant public health concern, and effective and comprehensive interventions are needed to counteract the damaging effects of the infodemics during infectious disease epidemics, including COVID-19, and reduce infectious disease-related stigma.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A systematic review and meta-analysis on the prevalence of stigma in infectious diseases, including COVID-19: a call to action

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Some studies suggest that mental health conditions remained stable or declined throughout the initial lockdown period, others show an impact on specific groups such as women and young adults with an increased risk of a variety of mental conditions as consequences of COVID-19 including anger symptoms, depression, anxiety, stress-related conditions and substance use. 4 , 5 According to studies, symptoms of depression varied between 14.6% and 48.3% 6 and of anxiety between 6.33% and 50.9% and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) of 7–53.8%. 2 , 4 , 7 Another reason might be that macro-level factors contributing to mental health and mental conditions (e.g.…”

Section: Covid-19 and Mental Conditionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“… 4 , 5 According to studies, symptoms of depression varied between 14.6% and 48.3% 6 and of anxiety between 6.33% and 50.9% and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) of 7–53.8%. 2 , 4 , 7 Another reason might be that macro-level factors contributing to mental health and mental conditions (e.g. country-specific factors such as economic security in case of illness, social cohesion) and interpersonal factors (e.g.…”

Section: Covid-19 and Mental Conditionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The COVID-19 disaster and mental health—assessing, responding and recovering

Lindert

Jakubauskienė

Bilsen

2021

European Journal of Public Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) pandemic is a disaster that has impacted lives globally. The purpose of this paper is to understand the linkage between COVID-19 and its impact on mental health. To reach this aim, we reviewed the literature on COVID-19 and mental conditions. Based on the literature, we identified COVID-19 as an unexpected, large-scale event that disrupted communities and caused death, destruction and trauma which upended normal existence. For mental conditions, effects of the pandemic are likely to manifest in different ways: development of symptoms in previously healthy individuals, new episodes in those with predisposition to mental disorders and development of symptoms that do not meet diagnostic criteria. The level of mental health problems varies depending on the stage of the pandemic, country, population groups and types of conditions. This also applies to the level of suicide, although suicides do not seem to have increased during the pandemic. Yet, we identified a net of factors contributing to mental conditions, in general. These factors include demographic factors (e.g. female gender, younger and older age), social factors (e.g. economically disadvantaged), mental factors (e.g. pre-existing mental conditions) and relationship factors (e.g. stressful relationship, lack of relationships). Additionally, we identified COVID-19-specific factors such as threat to own life and threat to life of loved ones, containment measures and interruption of services and social life. We further explored potentially additional suicide-related risk factors. Regardless of differences, health care and psychosocial systems were in many countries not prepared to respond to a viral disaster. Viral disaster requires that responses not only include direct care but also responses to populations that may need support due to known determinants of mental health.

show abstract

Suicidal Behavior in the First Wave of the COVID-19 Pandemic

Giner

Vera-Varela²,

Vega

et al. 2022

Curr Psychiatry Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose of Review Since the declaration of the COVID-19 pandemic, there have been numerous social changes to try to contain the spread of the disease. These sudden changes in daily life have also changed the way we relate to others, in addition to creating a climate of uncertainty and fear. Therefore, the objective of this review is to compile published data of the consequences of suicidal behavior in the first months from the onset of the pandemic. Recent Findings The analysis reflects a concern about issues related to suicide since the beginning of the pandemic. A large number of online surveys have been released and have provided data on relatively large populations. The percentage of the population with suicidal ideation in that period seems to be approximately 5–15%. Many studies associate suicidal ideation with being young, female, and presence of sleep problems. Surveys of healthcare workers do not seem to indicate a higher prevalence of suicidal ideation compared to the general population. The incidence of suicide attempts seen in emergency departments did not seem to change, while the number of visits for other issues, unrelated to suicide, did decrease. The few studies on completed suicide do not indicate an increase in incidence in these first 6 months since March 2020, when the WHO declared the start of the pandemic. Summary It does not seem that there have been major changes in the figures related to suicidal behavior in the studies from the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, although it is still too early to know the consequences it will have long term. The social and economic damages resulting from the pandemic will certainly take a long time to recover.

show abstract

Mental Health and Psychological Responses During the Coronavirus Disease 2019 Epidemic: A Comparison Between Wuhan and Other Areas in China

Cited by 13 publications

References 34 publications

A systematic review and meta-analysis on the prevalence of stigma in infectious diseases, including COVID-19: a call to action

A systematic review and meta-analysis on the prevalence of stigma in infectious diseases, including COVID-19: a call to action

The COVID-19 disaster and mental health—assessing, responding and recovering

Suicidal Behavior in the First Wave of the COVID-19 Pandemic

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About