ArticleFrontiers in psychiatry2025
The relationship between safety measures, preparedness, and mental health outcomes in New York City during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Article in Frontiers in psychiatry, 2025. 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.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The COVID-19 pandemic necessitated strict safety measures and preparedness, potentially influencing mental well-being worldwide. This study investigated the impact of safety measures and preparedness levels on mental health outcomes during the COVID-19 pandemic in New York City, USA examining how sociodemographic characteristics modified these associations. Method: A longitudinal study of 1,227 participants from three ongoing cohorts, provided data through telephone interviews across three waves from March 2020 to August 2021. Depression and anxiety were measured using Patient Health Questionnaire 8 (PHQ-8) and Generalized Anxiety Disorder 7 (GAD-7). Logistic regression models were used to investigate associations between safety measures, preparedness, and mental health outcomes over time, adjusting for potential confounders and assessing the modification effect of demographic factors. Results: At Wave 1, 18% of participants reported moderate to severe depression, while 20% had moderate to severe anxiety. Over time, these rates declined significantly, with depression dropping to 9% and anxiety to 10% by Wave 3. Safety measures practiced at Wave 1 showed a protective effect on depression at Wave 3 (OR=0.45, 95% CI: 0.22, 0.91). Higher preparedness levels were significantly associated with reduced odds of anxiety (aOR=0.72, 95% CI: 0.55, 0.93) in the concurrent wave. Age specific analysis revealed that individuals aged 26-35 experienced stronger protective effects from higher preparedness levels (OR=0.43, 95% CI: 0.2, 0.92) compared to younger age groups. Conclusion: This study highlights the importance of safety measures and preparedness in mitigating mental health challenges during crises. Addressing age specific factors and preparedness levels can guide the public health strategies to better support diverse populations.
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.