ArticleFrontiers in psychology2023
Public mental health during and after the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic: Opportunities for intervention
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- New Antidepressant Prescriptions Before, During, and After the COVID-19 Pandemic: Sex and Age Differences in a Population-Based Ecological Study.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Importance: During the pandemic, the number of United States adults reporting clinically significant symptoms of anxiety and depression sky-rocketed, up from 11% in 2020 to more than 40% in 2021. Our current mental healthcare system cannot adequately accommodate the current crisis; it is therefore important to identify opportunities for public mental health interventions. Objective: Assess whether modifiable emotional factors may offer a point of intervention for the mental health crisis. Design setting and participants: From January 13 to 15, 2022, adults living in the United States were recruited Main outcomes and measures: Linear regressions tested whether the primary outcomes during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic (depressive and anxiety symptoms, burnout) were associated with hypothesized modifiable risk factors (loneliness and need for closure) and hypothesized modifiable protective factors (the ability to perceive emotions and connect with others emotionally; emotion-regulation efficacy; and resilience, or the ability to "bounce back" after negative events). Results: The sample included 1,323 adults (mean [SD] age 41.42 [12.52] years; 636 women [48%]), almost half of whom reported clinically significant depressive (29%) and/or anxiety (15%) symptoms. Approximately 90% of participants indicated feeling burned out at least once a year and nearly half of participants (45%) felt burned out once a week or more. In separate analyses, depressive symptoms (Model A), anxiety symptoms (Model B), and burnout (Model C) were statistically significantly associated with loneliness (βModel A, 0.38; 95% CI, 0.33-0.43; βModel B, 0.30; 95% CI, 0.26-0.36; βModel C, 0.34; 95% CI, 0.28-0.41), need for closure (βModel A, 0.09; 95% CI, 1.03-1.06; βModel B, 0.13; 95% CI, 0.97-0.17; βModel C, 0.11; 95% CI, 0.07-0.16), recent stressful life events (βModel A, 0.14; 95% CI, 0.10-0.17; βModel B, 0.14; 95% CI, 0.11-0.18; βModel C, 0.10; 95% CI, 0.06-0.15), and resilience (βModel A, -0.10; 95% CI, -0.15 to -0.05; βModel B, -0.18; 95% CI, -0.23 to -0.13; βModel C, -0.11; 95% CI, -0.17 to -0.05). In addition, depressive and anxiety symptoms were associated with emotional self-efficacy (βModel A, -0.17; 95% CI, -0.22 to -0.12; βModel B, -0.11; 95% CI, -0.17 to -0.06), and beliefs about the malleability of emotions (βModel A, -0.08; 95% CI, -0.12 to -0.03; βModel B, -0.09; 95% CI, -0.13 to -0.04). Associations between loneliness and symptoms were weaker among those with more emotional self-efficacy, more endorsement of emotion malleability beliefs, and greater resilience, in separate models. Analyses controlled for recent stressful life events, optimism, and social desirability. Conclusion and relevance: Public mental health interventions that teach resilience in response to negative events, emotional self-efficacy, and emotion-regulation efficacy may protect against the development of depressive symptoms, anxiety, and burnout, particularly in the context of a collective trauma. Emotional self-efficacy and regulation efficacy may mitigate the association between loneliness and mental health, but loneliness prevention research is also needed to address the current mental health crisis.
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.