President Trump Stress Disorder: Partisanship, Ethnicity, and Expressive Reporting of Mental Distress After the 2016 Election

Krupenkin, Masha; Rothschild, David; Hill, Shawndra; Yom‐Tov, Elad

doi:10.1177/2158244019830865

Cited by 18 publications

(25 citation statements)

References 45 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…1,2 We focused on Latina women based on the available data, the compelling findings from Kreiger et al, 19 and the growing body of evidence of anxiety in the Latino community due to the Trump presidency. 4,7…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Association of Preterm Births Among US Latina Women With the 2016 Presidential Election

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Key Points Question Did preterm births increase among Latina women who were pregnant during the 2016 US presidential election? Findings This population-based study used an interrupted time series design to assess 32.9 million live births and found that the number of preterm births among Latina women increased above expected levels after the election. Meaning The 2016 presidential election may have been associated with adverse health outcomes of Latina women and their newborns.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Association of Preterm Births Among US Latina Women With the 2016 Presidential Election

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The 2016 US presidential election has been linked to increases in psychological distress, and short term mood changes following the election associated with more sustained physiological stress responses among young adults 2223. Studies have also shown an increase in psychological concerns and preterm births among Latina women following the 2016 election 2425. Along with our data, this suggests that large scale political events can influence factors relevant to mental and physical health, particularly for those with specific concerns about how the events may affect their lives.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Political events and mood among young physicians: a prospective cohort study

Frank

Nallamothu

Zhuo

et al. 2019

BMJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectiveTo study the effects of recent political events on mood among young physicians.DesignProspective cohort study.SettingUnited States medical centres.Participants2345 medical interns provided longitudinal mood data as part of the Intern Health Study between 2016 and 2018.Main outcome measuresMean mood score during the week following influential political and non-political events as compared with mean mood during the preceding four week control period.ResultsWe identified nine political events and eight non-political events for analysis. With the start of internship duties in July, the mean decline in mood for interns was −0.30 (95% confidence interval −0.33 to −0.27, t=−17.45, P<0.001). The decline in mood was of similar magnitude following the 2016 presidential election (mean mood change −0.32, 95% confidence interval −0.45 to −0.19, t=−4.73, P<0.001) and subsequent inauguration (mean mood change −0.25, 95% confidence interval −0.37 to −0.12, t=−3.93, P<0.001). Further, compared with men, women reported greater mood declines after both the 2016 election (mean gender difference 0.31, 95% confidence interval 0.05 to 0.58, t=2.33, P=0.02) and the inauguration (mean gender difference 0.25, 95% confidence interval 0.01 to 0.49, t=2.05, P=0.04). Overall, there were statistically significant changes in mood following 66.7% (6/9) of political events assessed. In contrast, none of the non-political events included in the analysis were statistically significantly associated with a change in mood.ConclusionsMacro level factors such as politics may be correlated with the mood of young doctors. This finding signals the need for further evaluation of the consequences of increasing entanglement between politics and medicine moving forward for young physicians and their patients.

show abstract

“…Those deepening divisions almost certainly exacerbated a pre-existing tendency for politics to take a toll on the physical, psychological and social health of Americans. Between Trump's 2016 election victory and his 2020 re-election campaign psychotherapists reported a significant jump in patients reporting politics negatively affecting their mental health [2], the American Psychological Association identified politics as a major source of stress for American adults [3], and there were sizeable increases in rates of depression, anxiety, loss of sleep, and emotional reactivity among groups with high levels of opposition to President Trump such as Democrats, racial minorities and students [4][5][6].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Politics is making us sick: The negative impact of political engagement on public health during the Trump administration

Smith

2022

PLoS ONE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives To quantify the effect of politics on the physical, psychological, and social health of American adults during the four-year span of the Trump administration. Methods A previously validated politics and health scale was used to compare health markers in nationally representative surveys administered to separate samples in March 2017 (N = 800) and October 2020 (N = 700). Participants in the 2020 survey were re-sampled approximately two weeks after the 2020 election and health markers were compared to their pre-election baselines. Results Large numbers of Americans reported politics takes a significant toll on a range of health markers—everything from stress, loss of sleep, or suicidal thoughts to an inability to stop thinking about politics and making intemperate social media posts. The proportion of Americans reporting these effects stayed stable or slightly increased between the spring of 2017 and the fall of 2020 prior to the presidential election. Deterioration in measures of physical health became detectably worse in the wake of the 2020 election. Those who were young, politically interested, politically engaged, or on the political left were more likely to report negative effects. Conclusions Politics is a pervasive and largely unavoidable source of chronic stress that exacted significant health costs for large numbers of American adults between 2017 and 2020. The 2020 election did little to alleviate those effects and quite likely exacerbated them.

show abstract

President Trump Stress Disorder: Partisanship, Ethnicity, and Expressive Reporting of Mental Distress After the 2016 Election

Cited by 18 publications

References 45 publications

Association of Preterm Births Among US Latina Women With the 2016 Presidential Election

Association of Preterm Births Among US Latina Women With the 2016 Presidential Election

Political events and mood among young physicians: a prospective cohort study

Politics is making us sick: The negative impact of political engagement on public health during the Trump administration

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About