Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37269774›Full record

ArticleJournal of psychiatric research2023

Networks of pandemic-specific stressors, risk factors, and clinical symptoms: A comparison between women and men during the early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Leonie von Hülsen, Laura Kenntemich, Ingo Schäfer, Maria Böttche, Brigitte Lueger-Schuster, Jürgen Gallinat, Annett Lotzin

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of psychiatric research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 23% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. 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

7 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Leonie von HülsenDepartment of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University Medical Center Hamburg Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany. Electronic address: l.vonhuelsen.ext@uke.de.
Laura KenntemichDepartment of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University Medical Center Hamburg Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany; Department of Psychology, MSH Medical School Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany.
Ingo SchäferDepartment of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University Medical Center Hamburg Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.
Maria BöttcheDivision of Clinical Psychological Intervention, Freie Universität Berlin, Berlin, Germany; Research Department Center ÜBERLEBEN, Berlin, Germany.
Brigitte Lueger-SchusterUnit of Psychotraumatology, Faculty of Psychology, University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Jürgen GallinatDepartment of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University Medical Center Hamburg Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.
Annett LotzinDepartment of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University Medical Center Hamburg Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany; Department of Psychology, MSH Medical School Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany.
Universität Hamburg · DEUniversity of Vienna · ATZentrum Überleben · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDuring the COVID-19 pandemic, female gender was a robust factor associated with mental health problems. This study aimed to investigate associations between pandemic-related risk factors, stressors, and clinical symptoms, with special reference to gender and possible differential gender effects.

methodsParticipants were recruited from June to September 2020 through an online survey (ESTSS ADJUST study). Women (N = 796) and men (N = 796) were matched on age, education, income, and living community. Symptoms of depression (PHQ-9), anxiety (PHQ-4), adjustment disorder (ADNM-8), and PTSD (PC-PTSD-5) and different risk factors including pandemic-specific stressors (PaSS) were assessed. Separate network analyses for men and women were conducted and compared followed by a joint network analysis including gender.

resultsThe networks of women and men did not differ in their structure (M = 0.14, p = .174) or strength of associations (S = 1.22, p = .126). Few relationships differed significantly between genders e.g., the connection between burden through work-related problems and anxiety was stronger in women. In the joint network, single factors were related to gender e.g., men felt more burdened through work-related problems and women through conflicts at home. LIMITATIONS: We cannot imply causal relationships due to the cross-sectional data of our study. The findings cannot be generalized as the sample is not representative.

conclusionMen and women seem to show comparable networks of risk factors, stressors, and clinical symptoms, although differences in individual connections and in levels of clinical symptoms and burdens were found.

Indexed as

COVID-19AnxietyCross-Sectional StudiesDepressionFemaleHumansMalePandemicsRisk FactorsCOVID-19GenderMental healthNetwork analysisPandemic-specific stressors

Identifiers

PMID37269774
PMCPMC10182883
OpenAlexW4376619890

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.