Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33660187›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of behavioral medicine2021

Sociodemographic and Psychological Risk Factors for Anxiety and Depression: Findings from the Covid-19 Health and Adherence Research in Scotland on Mental Health (CHARIS-MH) Cross-sectional Survey.

Gill Hubbard, Chantal den Daas, Marie Johnston, Diane Dixon

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of behavioral medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 47 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
47citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

47 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Adaptation of the Short-form 6-item UCLA Loneliness Scale (ULS-6) into Turkish.Turk psikiyatri dergisi = Turkish journal of psychiatry · 2025
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

4 authors.

Gill HubbardDepartment of Nursing and Midwifery, University of the Highlands and Islands, Institute of Health Research and Innovation, Inverness, Scotland. gill.hubbard@uhi.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2165-5770
Chantal den DaasHealth Psychology Group, University of Aberdeen Institute of Applied Health Sciences, Aberdeen, Scotland.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0955-3691
Marie JohnstonHealth Psychology Group, University of Aberdeen Institute of Applied Health Sciences, Aberdeen, Scotland.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0124-4827
Diane DixonHealth Psychology Group, University of Aberdeen Institute of Applied Health Sciences, Aberdeen, Scotland.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7099-204X

Funding

Chief Scientist Office COV/ABN/20/07
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundInvestigations about mental health report prevalence rates with fewer studies investigating psychological and social factors influencing mental health during the Covid-19 pandemic. STUDY

aims(1) identify sociodemographic groups of the adult population at risk of anxiety and depression and (2) determine if the following social and psychological risk factors for poor mental health moderated these direct sociodemographic effects: loneliness, social support, threat perception, illness representations.

methodsCross-sectional nationally representative telephone survey in Scotland in June 2020. If available, validated instruments were used, for example, Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-4) to measure anxiety and depression. Simple linear regressions followed by examination of moderation effect.

resultsA total of 1006 participants; median age 53 years, 61.4% female, from all levels of area deprivation (i.e., 3.8% in the most deprived decile and 15.6% in the most affluent decile). Analyses show associations of anxiety and depression with sociodemographic (age, gender, deprivation), social (social support, loneliness) and psychological factors (perceived threat and illness representations). Mental health was poorer in younger adults, women and people living in the most deprived areas. Age effects were exacerbated by loneliness and illness representations, gender effects by loneliness and illness representations and deprivation effects by loneliness, social support, illness representations and perceived threat. In each case, the moderating variables amplified the detrimental effects of the sociodemographic factors.

conclusionsThese findings confirm the results of pre-Covid-19 pandemic studies about associations between sociodemographics and mental health. Loneliness, lack of social support and thoughts about Covid-19 exacerbated these effects and offer pointers for pre-emptive action.

Indexed as

COVID-19Mental HealthAdultAnxietyCross-Sectional StudiesDepressionFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPandemicsRisk FactorsSARS-CoV-2ScotlandSurveys and QuestionnairesCoronavirusCOVID-19Illness representationsLonelinessPublic mental healthSocial supportThreat perception

Identifiers

PMID33660187
PMCPMC7929550

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.