ArticleBMC psychology2025
Risk perception and coping mechanisms by gender identity and education level during the COVID-19 syndemic in Spain.
Article in BMC psychology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIt is important to have a detailed understanding of the association between risk perception, coping mechanisms, and mental health outcomes during the COVID-19 syndemic across axes of inequity such as gender identity and education level.
methodsWe conducted a cross-sectional study among 2,066 adults (≥ 18 years) living in Spain via an online survey from April 8 to May 28, 2021. Anxiety and depression were the main outcomes considered to assess mental health, measured with the Generalized Anxiety Disorder 7 item (GAD-7) and Patient Health Questionnaire 9 item (PHQ-9), respectively. We analyzed the distribution of anxiety and depression levels across risk perception and coping mechanism variables, stratifying by gender identity and education level.
resultsAnxiety and depression levels were associated with age in a gradient fashion, with the 18-30 age group reporting the highest anxiety levels in both women (aOR: 3.11, 95% CI: 1.57-6.17) and men (aOR: 4.92, 1.90-12.74). This gradient was maintained especially in individuals with university level studies. For women, higher anxiety levels were associated with perceived risk in meeting up with friends and family (aOR: 1.73, 1.12-2.67) and being out in public (aOR 2.98, 2.15-4.14), whereas men perceived more risk in occupying closed public spaces and using public transportation (e.g., aOR: 2.14, 95% CI: 1.09-4.22). Connecting with friends and family was the most effective coping mechanism. In general, women reported more effective coping mechanisms than men and findings were strongest in the population with university level studies. Likewise, men with university level studies reported more effective coping mechanisms than men without university level studies.
conclusionsWomen and men with university level studies reported higher risk perception and more effective coping mechanisms during the COVID-19 syndemic than individuals without a university level education. These findings reveal possible strategies for primary care and public health agencies to follow to improve mental health outcomes along different axes of inequity, especially in the case of future syndemics and public health 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.