ArticleInternational journal of public health2026
COVID-19 testing and mental health service utilization in Ontario: a population-based cohort study.
Article in International journal of public health, 2026. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To examine differences in mental health-related healthcare utilization for anxiety and depression between individuals who did and did not undergo COVID-19 PCR testing in Ontario. Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has been associated with changes in mental health and healthcare utilization. Methods: We conducted a population-based retrospective cohort study using linked ICES data, including 6,175,114 adults (January 2020-March 2021). Exposure was PCR-positive, PCR-negative, or untested. The outcome was time to first mental health-related healthcare use for anxiety and depression, identified using validated codes. Adjusted hazard ratios (aHRs) were estimated using Cox models with propensity score matching. Results: Individuals who underwent testing had higher mental health-related healthcare utilization than untested individuals. This was observed in PCR-positive (aHR 6.37; 95% CI 6.25-6.50) and PCR-negative groups (aHR 5.91; 95% CI 5.87-5.95). Higher utilization occurred among younger individuals, females, and socioeconomically disadvantaged groups. Results were consistent in matched analyses. Conclusion: Individuals underwent testing had higher mental health service utilization; similar estimates across PCR-positive and PCR-negative groups suggest testing reflects underlying vulnerability and healthcare-seeking behavior rather than a causal effect on mental health outcomes.
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.