Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Filter
1.
Dialogues Health ; 2: 100091, 2023 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2149626

ABSTRACT

Extant literature investigates the impact of COVID-19 on mental health outcomes, however there is a paucity of work examining mental health distress as a risk factor for COVID-19 outcomes. While systemic variables like income inequality relate to both mental health and COVID-19, more work is needed to test theoretically informed models including such variables. Using a social-ecological framework, we aimed to address these gaps in the literature by conducting a neighborhood-level analysis of potential mental health distress and systemic- (income inequality) level predictors of reported COVID-19 infection and mortality over time in Chicago. Neighborhood-level comparisons revealed differences in mental health distress, income inequality, and reported COVID-19 mortality, but not reported COVID-19 infection. Specifically, Westside and Southside neighborhoods generally reported higher levels of mental health distress and greater concentration of poverty. The Central neighborhood showed a decline in reported mortality rates over time. Multi-level negative binomial models established that Zip-codes with greater mental health distress were at increased reported COVID-19 infection risk, yet lower mortality risk; Zip-codes with more poverty were at increased reported COVID-19 infection risk, yet lower mortality risk; and Zip-codes with the highest percentage of People of Color were at decreased risk of reported COVID-19 mortality. Taken together, these findings substantiate Chicago neighborhood-level disparities in mental health distress, income inequality, and reported COVID-19 mortality; identify unique differential associations of mental health distress and income inequality to reported COVID-19 infection and reported mortality risk; and, offer an alternative lens towards understanding COVID-19 outcomes in terms of race/ethnicity.

2.
COVID-19 and psychology in Malaysia: Psychosocial effects, coping, and resilience ; : 39-53, 2022.
Article in English | APA PsycInfo | ID: covidwho-1733110

ABSTRACT

This article explores that Malaysia's distinctive cultural system, socioeconomic environment and implementation of physical distancing measures, it is essential to know how Malaysians were affected given the prolonged MCO. The following sections report a study done during the COVID-19 pandemic, examining various aspects of mental health, including psychological well-being, internalising symptoms (i.e., depression, anxiety and stress) and levels of loneliness and social support. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved)

3.
Front Psychiatry ; 12: 553021, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1170126

ABSTRACT

Background: The outbreak of COVID-19 occurred in 2020 which resulted in high levels of psychological stress in both the general public and healthcare providers. Purpose: The study aimed to address the mental health status of people in China in the early stage of the COVID-19 outbreak, and to identify differences among the general public, frontline, and non-frontline healthcare providers. Method: A cross-sectional study was used to identify the mental health status of the general public and healthcare providers between Jan 29 and Feb 11, 2020. Data were collected using an online survey from a convenience sample. The instruments used included: Patient Health Questionnaire, Generalized Anxiety Disorder scale, Insomnia Severity Index, and Impact of Event Scale-Revised. Descriptive statistics were used to describe the data. Kruskal-Wallis H tests were performed to assess differences in measurements among the three groups; P < 0.05 (two-sided) was considered to be statistically significant. Results: Results showed that a majority of participants experienced post-traumatic stress (68.8%), depression (46.1%), anxiety (39.8%), and insomnia (31.4%). Significant changes in the mental health status of frontline providers was found as compared to those of the other groups (P < 0.001). Interestingly, the scores of the general public were significantly higher than those of the non-frontline healthcare providers (P < 0.001). Conclusion: These findings provide information to evaluate outbreak associated psychological stress for the general public and healthcare providers, and assist in providing professional support and actionable guidance to ease psychological stress and improve mental health.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL