ArticleBrain and behavior2023
Estonian National Mental Health Study: Design and methods for a registry-linked longitudinal survey.
Article in Brain and behavior, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Economic cost of excess body weight among adults in Estonia.Central European journal of public health · 2026Article
- Article
- The healthcare costs of physical inactivity among adults in Estonia.BMC public health · 2025Article
- Negative affect instability predicts elevated depressive and generalized anxiety disorder symptoms even when negative affect intensity is controlled for: an ecological momentary assessment study.Frontiers in psychology · 2024Article
- Estonian National Mental Health Study: Design and methods for a registry-linked longitudinal survey.Brain and behavior · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
19 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThe Estonian National Mental Health Study (EMHS) was conducted in 2021-2022 to provide population-wide data on mental health in the context of COVID-19 pandemic. The main objective of this paper is to describe the rationale, design, and methods of the EMHS and to evaluate the survey response.
methodsRegionally representative stratified random sample of 20,000 persons aged 15 years and older was drawn from the Estonian Population Register for the study. Persons aged 18 years and older at the time of the sampling were enrolled into three survey waves where they were invited to complete an online or postal questionnaire about mental well-being and disorders, and behavioral, cognitive, and other risk factors. Persons younger than 18 years of age were invited to fill an anonymous online questionnaire starting from wave 2. To complement and validate survey data, data on socio-demographic, health-related, and environmental variables were collected from six national administrative databases and registries. Additionally, a subsample was enrolled into a validation study using ecological momentary assessment.
resultsIn total, 5636 adults participated in the survey wave 1, 3751 in wave 2, and 4744 in wave 3. Adjusted response rates were 30.6%, 21.1%, and 27.6%, respectively. Women and older age groups were more likely to respond. Throughout the three survey waves, a considerable share of adult respondents screened positive for depression (27.6%, 25.1%, and 25.6% in waves 1, 2, and 3, respectively). Women and young adults aged 18 to 29 years had the highest prevalence of depression symptoms.
conclusionsThe registry-linked longitudinal EMHS dataset comprises a rich and trustworthy data source to allow in-depth analysis of mental health outcomes and their correlates among the Estonian population. The study serves as an evidence base for planning mental health policies and prevention measures for possible future crises.
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.