Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33333893›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2020

The Psychological Impact of 'Mild Lockdown' in Japan during the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Nationwide Survey under a Declared State of Emergency.

Tetsuya Yamamoto, Chigusa Uchiumi, Naho Suzuki, Junichiro Yoshimoto, Eric Murillo-Rodriguez

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 116 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
116citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
14.4field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

116 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 196 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

56 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Tetsuya YamamotoGraduate School of Technology, Industrial and Social Sciences, Tokushima University, 1-1, Minamijosanjima-cho, Tokushima 770-8502, Japan.
Chigusa UchiumiGraduate School of Technology, Industrial and Social Sciences, Tokushima University, 1-1, Minamijosanjima-cho, Tokushima 770-8502, Japan.
Naho SuzukiFaculty of Integrated Arts and Sciences, Tokushima University, 1-1, Minamijosanjima-cho, Tokushima 770-8502, Japan.
Junichiro YoshimotoGraduate School of Science and Technology, NAIST, 8916-5 Takayama-cho, Ikoma, Nara 630-0192, Japan.ORCID 0000-0001-7995-0321
Eric Murillo-RodriguezEscuela de Medicina, División Ciencias de la Salud, Universidad Anáhuac Mayab, Carr. Mérida Progreso Km. 15.5, Mérida C.P. 97310, Mexico.ORCID 0000-0001-9307-3783
Tokushima University · JPAnahuac Mayab University · MXNara Institute of Science and Technology · JP

Funding

Japan Society for the Promotion of Science 18K13323Japan Society for the Promotion of Science 20K10883
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study examined the psychological distress caused by non-coercive lockdown (mild lockdown) in Japan. An online survey was conducted with 11,333 people (52.4% females; mean age = 46.3 ± 14.6 years, range = 18-89 years) during the mild lockdown in the seven prefectures most affected by COVID-19 infection. Over one-third (36.6%) of participants experienced mild-to-moderate psychological distress (Kessler Psychological Distress Scale [K6] score 5-12), while 11.5% reported serious psychological distress (K6 score ≥ 13). The estimated prevalence of depression (Patient Health Questionnaire-9 score ≥ 10) was 17.9%. Regarding the distribution of K6 scores, the proportion of those with psychological distress in this study was significantly higher when compared with the previous national survey data from 2010, 2013, 2016, and 2019. Healthcare workers, those with a history of treatment for mental illness, and younger participants (aged 18-19 or 20-39 years) showed particularly high levels of psychological distress. Psychological distress severity was influenced by specific interactional structures of risk factors: high loneliness, poor interpersonal relationships, COVID-19-related sleeplessness and anxiety, deterioration of household economy, and work and academic difficulties. Even when non-coercive lockdowns are implemented, people's mental health should be considered, and policies to prevent mental health deterioration are needed. Cross-disciplinary public-private sector efforts tailored to each individual's problem structure are important to address the mental health issues arising from lockdown.

Indexed as

Mental HealthPandemicsAdolescentAdultCOVID-19FemaleHealth PersonnelHumansJapanMaleMental DisordersMiddle AgedQuarantineSocial IsolationSurveys and QuestionnairesYoung AdultanxietyCOVID-19depressionK6lockdownlonelinessmental healthpandemicPHQ-9psychological distress

Identifiers

PMID33333893
PMCPMC7765307
OpenAlexW3113223251

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.