ArticleBMC public health2023
Stress/depression across the COVID-19 pandemic in Denmark.
Article in BMC public health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Changes in anxiety and depression during the COVID-19 pandemic in the European population: A meta-analysis of changes and associations with restriction policies.European psychiatry : the journal of the Association of European Psychiatrists · 2023Pooled it
- Resurgence of Respiratory Syncytial Virus in the Summer of 2021 in Denmark-a Large out-of-season Epidemic Affecting Older Children.Open forum infectious diseases · 2024Article
- The association between the sense of control and depression during the COVID-19 pandemic: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundGlobal estimates suggest strained mental health during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic, but the lack of nationally representative and longitudinal data with clinically validated measures limits knowledge longer into the pandemic.
methodsData from 10 rounds of nationally representative surveys from Denmark tracked trends in risk of stress/depression from just before the first lockdown and through to April 2022. We focused on age groups and men and women in different living arrangements and controlled for seasonality in mental health that could otherwise be spuriously related to pandemic intensity.
resultsPrior to first lockdown, we observed a "parent gap", which closed with the first lockdown. Instead, a gender gap materialized, with women experiencing higher risks than men-and higher than levels predating first lockdown. Older respondents (+ 70 years) experienced increasing risks of stress/depression early in the pandemic, while all other groups experienced decreases. But longer into the pandemic, risks increased for all age groups and reached (and sometimes exceeded) levels from before first lockdown.
conclusionDenmark had low infection rates throughout most of the pandemic, low mortality rates across the entire pandemic, and offered financial aid packages to curb financial strains. Despite this circumstance, initial improvements to mental health during the first lockdown in Denmark were short-lived. Two years of pandemic societal restrictions correspond with deteriorating mental health, as well as a change from a parenthood gap in mental health before first lockdown to a gender gap two years into the pandemic.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.