» Articles » PMID: 33923936

The Significance of Demographic Variables on Psychosocial Health from the Early Stage and Nine Months After the COVID-19 Pandemic Outbreak. A Cross-National Study

Overview
Publisher MDPI
Date 2021 Apr 30
PMID 33923936
Citations 11
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

This cross-national study explored stability and change in mental health, quality of life, well-being and loneliness during the early stage and nine months after the implementation of COVID-19 pandemic social distancing measures and periodic lockdowns as adjusted by demographic variables. In the USA, the UK, Australia and Norway, 7284 individuals responded to the invitation to take part in two cross-sectional web-based surveys (April and November 2020), including questions about sociodemographic variables and psychosocial outcomes. Independent -tests and generalized linear models (GLM) and estimated marginal means were used to analyze differences between subgroups and countries, multiple linear regression analyses were conducted on the psychosocial outcome measures by demographic variables and time in each country and mean responses presented by time after adjusting for all demographic variables in the model. Age, gender, civil status, education, employment, place of work and living area were all significant factors for psychosocial health across the countries. Differences in mental health, quality of life, well-being and loneliness were found between the countries in both April and November 2020, while time did not contribute to reducing the toll in any of the four countries over the nine-month period.

Citing Articles

Parent-Reported Child and Parent Quality of Life during COVID-19 Testing at an Australian Paediatric Hospital Outpatient Clinic: A Cross-Sectional Study.

Brusco N, Danchin M, Watts J, Jos C, Loughnan M, Williams T Healthcare (Basel). 2023; 11(18).

PMID: 37761750 PMC: 10530877. DOI: 10.3390/healthcare11182555.


Comparing the effects of reduced social contact on psychosocial wellbeing before and during the COVID-19 pandemic: a longitudinal survey from two Norwegian counties.

Kalseth J, Adnanes M, Ose S, Lassemo E, Kaspersen S, das Nair R Qual Life Res. 2023; 32(6):1771-1784.

PMID: 36773270 PMC: 9922041. DOI: 10.1007/s11136-023-03350-z.


A health impact assessment of gender inequities associated with psychological distress during COVID19 in Australia's most locked down state-Victoria.

Brucki B, Bagade T, Majeed T BMC Public Health. 2023; 23(1):233.

PMID: 36732738 PMC: 9894749. DOI: 10.1186/s12889-022-14356-6.


Associations between social media use and loneliness in a cross-national population: do motives for social media use matter?.

Bonsaksen T, Ruffolo M, Price D, Leung J, Thygesen H, Lamph G Health Psychol Behav Med. 2023; 11(1):2158089.

PMID: 36618890 PMC: 9817115. DOI: 10.1080/21642850.2022.2158089.


Labor force participation during COVID-19 and risk of depression: a Danish register study.

Hellmann S, Moller S, Ersboll A, Santini Z, Nielsen M, Gronbaek M Eur J Public Health. 2022; 33(1):80-86.

PMID: 36399090 PMC: 9897998. DOI: 10.1093/eurpub/ckac168.


References
1.
Vindegaard N, Benros M . COVID-19 pandemic and mental health consequences: Systematic review of the current evidence. Brain Behav Immun. 2020; 89:531-542. PMC: 7260522. DOI: 10.1016/j.bbi.2020.05.048. View

2.
Xiong J, Lipsitz O, Nasri F, Lui L, Gill H, Phan L . Impact of COVID-19 pandemic on mental health in the general population: A systematic review. J Affect Disord. 2020; 277:55-64. PMC: 7413844. DOI: 10.1016/j.jad.2020.08.001. View

3.
Ostertun Geirdal A, Dheyauldeen S, Bachmann-Harildstad G, Heimdal K . Quality of life in patients with hereditary hemorrhagic telangiectasia in Norway: a population based study. Am J Med Genet A. 2012; 158A(6):1269-78. DOI: 10.1002/ajmg.a.35309. View

4.
Kaasa S, Mastekaasa A, Naess S . Quality of life of lung cancer patients in a randomized clinical trial evaluated by a psychosocial well-being questionnaire. Acta Oncol. 1988; 27(4):335-42. DOI: 10.3109/02841868809093551. View

5.
Donath S . The validity of the 12-item General Health Questionnaire in Australia: a comparison between three scoring methods. Aust N Z J Psychiatry. 2001; 35(2):231-5. DOI: 10.1046/j.1440-1614.2001.00869.x. View