How does the COVID-19 pandemic impact on population mental health? A network analysis of COVID influences on depression, anxiety and traumatic stress in the UK population.
Journal
Psychological medicine
ISSN: 1469-8978
Titre abrégé: Psychol Med
Pays: England
ID NLM: 1254142
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
16 Mar 2021
16 Mar 2021
Historique:
pubmed:
17
3
2021
medline:
17
3
2021
entrez:
16
3
2021
Statut:
aheadofprint
Résumé
The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) emergency has led to numerous attempts to assess the impact of the pandemic on population mental health. The findings indicate an increase in depression and anxiety but have been limited by the lack of specificity about which aspects of the pandemic (e.g. viral exposure or economic threats) have led to adverse mental health outcomes. Network analyses were conducted on data from wave 1 (N = 2025, recruited 23 March-28 March 2020) and wave 2 (N = 1406, recontacts 22 April-1 May 2020) of the COVID-19 Psychological Research Consortium Study, an online longitudinal survey of a representative sample of the UK adult population. Our models included depression (PHQ-9), generalized anxiety (GAD-7) and trauma symptoms (ITQ); and measures of COVID-specific anxiety, exposure to the virus in self and close others, as well as economic loss due to the pandemic. A mixed graphical model at wave 1 identified a potential pathway from economic adversity to anxiety symptoms via COVID-specific anxiety. There was no association between viral exposure and symptoms. Ising network models using clinical cut-offs for symptom scores at each wave yielded similar findings, with the exception of a modest effect of viral exposure on trauma symptoms at wave 1 only. Anxiety and depression symptoms formed separate clusters at wave 1 but not wave 2. The psychological impact of the pandemic evolved in the early phase of lockdown. COVID-related anxiety may represent the mechanism through which economic consequences of the pandemic are associated with psychiatric symptoms.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) emergency has led to numerous attempts to assess the impact of the pandemic on population mental health. The findings indicate an increase in depression and anxiety but have been limited by the lack of specificity about which aspects of the pandemic (e.g. viral exposure or economic threats) have led to adverse mental health outcomes.
METHODS
METHODS
Network analyses were conducted on data from wave 1 (N = 2025, recruited 23 March-28 March 2020) and wave 2 (N = 1406, recontacts 22 April-1 May 2020) of the COVID-19 Psychological Research Consortium Study, an online longitudinal survey of a representative sample of the UK adult population. Our models included depression (PHQ-9), generalized anxiety (GAD-7) and trauma symptoms (ITQ); and measures of COVID-specific anxiety, exposure to the virus in self and close others, as well as economic loss due to the pandemic.
RESULTS
RESULTS
A mixed graphical model at wave 1 identified a potential pathway from economic adversity to anxiety symptoms via COVID-specific anxiety. There was no association between viral exposure and symptoms. Ising network models using clinical cut-offs for symptom scores at each wave yielded similar findings, with the exception of a modest effect of viral exposure on trauma symptoms at wave 1 only. Anxiety and depression symptoms formed separate clusters at wave 1 but not wave 2.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
The psychological impact of the pandemic evolved in the early phase of lockdown. COVID-related anxiety may represent the mechanism through which economic consequences of the pandemic are associated with psychiatric symptoms.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33722329
doi: 10.1017/S0033291721000635
pii: S0033291721000635
pmc: PMC8010290
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1-9Subventions
Organisme : Medical Research Council
ID : MR/S006613/1
Pays : United Kingdom
Références
Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1999 Oct;56(10):921-6
pubmed: 10530634
J Psychiatr Res. 2019 Feb;109:52-58
pubmed: 30502492
Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2011 Jan;68(1):90-100
pubmed: 21199968
Annu Rev Clin Psychol. 2013;9:91-121
pubmed: 23537483
Psychiatry Res. 2020 Oct;292:113347
pubmed: 32763477
Behav Res Methods. 2018 Feb;50(1):195-212
pubmed: 28342071
Lancet Psychiatry. 2020 Jun;7(6):547-560
pubmed: 32304649
BJPsych Open. 2020 Oct 19;6(6):e125
pubmed: 33070797
Psychol Med. 2008 Nov;38(11):1659-69
pubmed: 18485262
Int J Methods Psychiatr Res. 2021 Mar;30(1):e1861
pubmed: 33166018
Sci Rep. 2014 Aug 01;4:5918
pubmed: 25082149
Acta Psychiatr Scand. 2018 Dec;138(6):536-546
pubmed: 30178492
Nat Rev Neurosci. 2013 Jul;14(7):488-501
pubmed: 23783199
Behav Res Ther. 2019 Sep;120:103419
pubmed: 31238299
Schizophr Bull. 2017 Jan;43(1):187-196
pubmed: 27165690
Arch Intern Med. 2006 May 22;166(10):1092-7
pubmed: 16717171
Psychol Med. 2017 Dec;47(16):2767-2776
pubmed: 28625186
Psychol Methods. 2018 Dec;23(4):617-634
pubmed: 29595293
BMC Public Health. 2012 Dec 27;12:1120
pubmed: 23270506
Global Health. 2020 Jul 6;16(1):57
pubmed: 32631403
Eur J Public Health. 2013 Feb;23(1):108-13
pubmed: 22434207
Psychol Med. 2016 Dec;46(16):3359-3369
pubmed: 27623748
Phys Rev E Stat Nonlin Soft Matter Phys. 2004 Feb;69(2 Pt 2):026113
pubmed: 14995526
Psychol Med. 1998 Nov;28(6):1321-8
pubmed: 9854273
Glob Health Res Policy. 2020 Jun 5;5:29
pubmed: 32514428
Psychol Med. 2013 May;43(5):897-910
pubmed: 22781489
Clin Psychol Rev. 2013 Dec;33(8):1148-62
pubmed: 24121465
Psychosom Med. 2020 Oct 1;:
pubmed: 33009276
Br J Psychiatry. 2005 Mar;186:182-4
pubmed: 15738496
Behav Res Ther. 2016 Nov;86:95-104
pubmed: 27424882
Psychol Health. 2013;28(4):434-49
pubmed: 23121110
Am J Public Health. 2007 Jul;97(7):1261-8
pubmed: 17538058
Psychiatry Res. 2020 Sep;291:113251
pubmed: 32593071
J Clin Psychiatry. 2011 Mar;72(3):341-8
pubmed: 21294994
Lancet Psychiatry. 2020 Jul;7(7):567-568
pubmed: 32502467
Lancet Psychiatry. 2020 Oct;7(10):883-892
pubmed: 32707037