Disparities in COVID-19 Impacts on Work Hours and Career Satisfaction by Gender and Race among Scientists in the US: An Online Survey Study

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on work-life balance may be unequal between female and male scientists. Further information is needed regarding whether the working conditions and career satisfaction for women and racialized scientists are disproportionately affected by the pandemic. This online survey collected data from 1171 scientists in science, technology, engineering, mathematics (STEM), and medicine (STEMM), public health, or other areas of science/engineering working in the US to examine potential disparities in changes in work hours and career satisfaction by gender and race/ethnicity. A significantly higher percentage of women reported increased work hours compared to men. Women, especially racialized women, experienced disproportionately higher increases in teaching and service than the other groups, which contributed to the increased total work hours for women. Satisfaction with the current career progress was lowest for racialized women compared to their counterparts. Our results indicate that the pandemic has inequitably affected allocation of workloads and career satisfaction by gender and race in scientific fields. Institutions of higher education and other research organizations should acknowledge the gender/race differences in science before and during the pandemic to better support the career development and achievement of all scientists, especially women and even more so racialized women.

Impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on scientists' productivity in science, technology, engineering, mathematics (STEM), and medicine fields.

While studies suggested adverse impacts of COVID-19 on scientific outputs and work routines for scientists, more evidence is required to understand detailed obstacles challenging scientists' work and productivity during the pandemic, including how different people are affected (e.g., by gender). This online survey-based thematic analysis investigated how the pandemic affected scientists' perception of scientific and academic productivity in the science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) and medicine fields. The analysis examined if inequitable changes in duties and responsibilities for caregiving for children, family, and/or households exist between scientists who are mothers compared to scientists who are fathers or non-parents. The survey collected data from 2548 survey responses in six languages across 132 countries. Results indicate that many scientists suffered from delays and restrictions on research activities and administrations due to the lockdown of institutions, as well as increased workloads from adapting to online teaching environment. Caregiving responsibility for children and family increased, which compromised time for academic efforts, especially due to the temporary shutdown of social supports. Higher percentages of female parent participants than male parent participants expressed such increased burdens indicating unequal divisions of caregiving between women and men. A range of physical and mental health issues was identified mainly due to overworking and isolation. Despite numerous obstacles, some participants reported advantages during the pandemic including the efficiency of online teaching, increased funding for COVID-related research, application of alternative research methodologies, and fluidity of the workday from not commuting. Findings imply the need for rapid institutional support to aid various academic activities and diminish gender inequity in career development among academicians, highlighting how crisis can exacerbate existing inequalities.

Differences in self-perception of productivity and mental health among the STEMM-field scientists during the COVID-19 pandemic by sex and status as a parent: A survey in six languages.

The COVID-19 pandemic has caused unprecedented challenges for working conditions for scientists, but little is known for how the associations of these challenges with scientists' mental health and productivity differ by sex and status as a parent. This online survey study in six languages collected data from 4,494 scientists in Science, Technology, Engineering, Mathematics, and Medicine fields across 132 countries during October-December 2021. We compared the type of challenges for work, changes in work hours, and perception in productivity during the pandemic by sex and status as a parent (children <18 years living at home). Regression analyses analyzed the impacts of changed working conditions and work-life factors on productivity and mental health. We found that the percentage of participants with increased work hours was the highest in female participants, especially without children. Disproportionately higher increases in work hours were found for teaching and administration in women than men and for research/fundraising in non-parent participants than parent participants (p-value<0.001). Female participants were more concerned about the negative impacts of the pandemic on publications and long-term career progress, and less satisfied with their career progress than their male counterparts. There were differences in the type of institutional actions for the pandemic across study regions. The identified obstacles for work and home-life factors were associated with higher risks of experiencing depression, anxiety, and stress. Decision makers should consider the gender differences in the pandemic's adverse impacts on productivity in establishing equitable actions for career progress for scientists during pandemics.

Individual and regional characteristics associated with changes in mental health before and during the COVID-19 pandemic in South Korea.

Mental health has been a major public health concerns during the COVID-19 pandemic. This study investigated the effects of COVID-19 on mental health and whether individual and regional characteristics are associated with the changes in mental health. We estimated district-specific changes in the prevalence of moderate stress, extreme stress, and depression before and during the COVID-19 pandemic after adjusting for the time trend of mental health outcomes. Then, a meta-regression was conducted to examine the associations between district-level characteristics and changes in mental health due to the pandemic. The prevalence of moderate stress, extreme stress, and depression increased during the pandemic and the increases were more prominent in districts with high population density and in individuals aged 19-59 years, with a high education level, and with high household income. The % with reduced physical activity due to the pandemic were positively associated with increases in stress; while, the % that have mutual trust among neighbors and the number of sports facilities were negatively associated with increases in stress. Local tax per person had a positive association with increase in depression. Our study provides epidemiological evidence into the mental health consequences of the pandemic, which can inform the priority of resource allocation for managing mental health.

Impact of Changed Use of Greenspace during COVID-19 Pandemic on Depression and Anxiety.

The COVID-19 pandemic has had devastating consequences for health, social, and economic domains, but what has received far less focus is the effect on people's relationship to vital ecological supports, including access to greenspace. We assessed patterns of greenspace use in relation to individual and environmental factors and their relationship with experiencing psychological symptoms under the pandemic. We conducted an online survey recruiting participants from social media for adults in Korea for September-December 2020. The survey collected data on demographics, patterns of using greenspace during the pandemic, and major depression (MD) and generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) symptoms. The Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) and the Generalized Anxiety Disorder 2-item (GAD-2) were applied to identify probable cases of MD and GAD. A logistic regression model assessed the association decreased visits to greenspace after the outbreak compared to 2019 and probable MD and GAD. Among the 322 survey participants, prevalence of probable MD and GAD were 19.3% and 14.9%, respectively. High rates of probable MD (23.3%) and GAD (19.4%) were found among persons currently having job-related and financial issues. Of the total participants, 64.9% reported decreased visits to greenspace after the COVID-19 outbreak. Persons with decreased visits to greenspace had 2.06 higher odds (95% CI: 0.91, 4.67, significant at p < 0.10) of probable MD at the time of the survey than persons whose visits to greenspace increased or did not change. Decreased visits to greenspace were not significantly associated with GAD (OR = 1.45, 95% CI: 0.63, 3.34). Findings suggest that barriers to greenspace use could deprive people of mental health benefits and affect mental health during pandemic; an alternative explanation is that those experiencing poor mental health may be less likely to visit greenspaces during pandemic. This implies the need of adequate interventions on greenspace uses under an outbreak especially focusing on how low-income populations may be more adversely affected by a pandemic and its policy responses.

Urban environments and COVID-19 in three Eastern states of the United States.

The United States has the highest numbers of confirmed cases and deaths during the novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Previous studies reported that urban residents are more vulnerable to the spread and mortality of COVID-19 than rural residents. However, the pathways through which urban environments affect COVID-19 spread and mortality are unclear. We collected daily data on the number of confirmed cases and deaths of COVID-19 from Mar. 01 to Nov. 16, 2020 for all 91 counties in New York, New Jersey, and Connecticut in the United States. We calculated the COVID-19 incidence %, daily reproduction number, and mortality %, then estimated the associations with urban environment indicators using regression models. COVID-19 outcomes were generally highest in areas with high population density, and this pattern was evident in the early period of epidemic. Among the area-level demographic variables, the percentage of Black or Hispanic residents showed the strongest positive association with COVID-19 outcomes. Higher risk of COVID-19 outcomes was also associated with higher percentage of overcrowded households, uninsured people, and income inequality. The percent elderly, sex ratio (the ratio of males to females), and greenness were negatively associated with risk of COVID-19 outcomes. The results of this study could indicate where resources are most needed.

Relationships between Local Green Space and Human Mobility Patterns during COVID-19 for Maryland and California, USA

Human mobility is a significant factor for disease transmission. Little is known about how the environment influences mobility during a pandemic. The aim of this study was to investigate an effect of green space on mobility reductions during the early stage of the COVID-19 pandemic in Maryland and California, USA. For 230 minor civil divisions (MCD) in Maryland and 341 census county divisions (CCD) in California, we obtained mobility data from Facebook Data for Good aggregating information of people using the Facebook app on their mobile phones with location history active. The users’movement between two locations was used to calculate the number of users that traveled into an MCD (or CCD) for each day in the daytime hours between 11 March and 26 April 2020. Each MCD’s (CCD’s) vegetation level was estimated as the average Enhanced Vegetation Index (EVI) level for 1 January through 31 March 2020. We calculated the number of state and local parks, food retail establishments, and hospitals for each MCD (CCD). Results showed that the daily percent changes in the number of travels declined during the study period. This mobility reduction was significantly lower in Maryland MCDs with state parks (p-value = 0.045), in California CCDs with local-scale parks (p-value = 0.048). EVI showed no association with mobility in both states. This finding has implications for the potential impacts of green space on mobility under an outbreak. Future studies are needed to explore these findings and to investigate changes in health effects of green space during a pandemic.

Reductions in mortality resulting from reduced air pollution levels due to COVID-19 mitigation measures.

To control the novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) outbreak, state and local governments in the United States have implemented several mitigation efforts that resulted in lower emissions of traffic-related air pollutants. This study examined the impacts of COVID-19 mitigation measures on air pollution levels and the subsequent reductions in mortality for urban areas in 10 US states and the District of Columbia. We calculated changes in levels of particulate matter with aerodynamic diameter no larger than 2.5 µm (PM2.5) during mitigation period versus the baseline period (pre-mitigation measure) using the difference-in-difference approach and the estimated avoided total and cause-specific mortality attributable to these changes in PM2.5 by state and district. We found that PM2.5 concentration during the mitigation period decreased for most states (except for 3 states) and the capital. Decreases of average PM2.5 concentration ranged from 0.25 µg/m3 (4.3%) in Maryland to 4.20 µg/m3 (45.1%) in California. On average, PM2.5 levels across 7 states and the capital reduced by 12.8%. We estimated that PM2.5 reduction during the mitigation period lowered air pollution-related total and cause-specific deaths. An estimated 483 (95% CI: 307, 665) PM2.5-related deaths was avoided in the urban areas of California. Our findings have implications for the effects of mitigation efforts and provide insight into the mortality reductions can be achieved from reduced air pollution levels.