1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10"title","abstract","authors","link","date","subject","source","initial_decision","q0","q1","q2","q3","q4","q5","q6","q7","q8","q9","q10","q11","q12","q13","q14","q15","q16","q17","q18","q19","q20","q21","q22","q23","q24","q25","q26","q27","q28","q29","q30","q31","q32","q33","q34","q35","q36","q37","q38","q39","q40","q41","q42","q43","q44","q45","q46","q47","q48","q49","q50","q51","q52","q53","q54","q55","q56","q57","q58","q59","q60","q61","q62","q63","q64","q65","q66","q67","q68","q69","q70","q71","q72","q73","q74","q75","q76","q77","q78","q79","q80","exclusion_reason","extraction_date","expert_decision","ID","o1"
"Prevalence and Incidence of Stress, Depression and Anxiety Symptoms among Brazilians in Quarantine across the early phases of the COVID-19 Crisis","Objective: The aim of this study was to measure the prevalence and incidence of stress, depression, and anxiety symptoms in Brazilians during the COVID-19 pandemic. Method: We assessed 103 (54 women, 49 men) participants online in three periods of the epidemic curve: time 1 (T1; first cases of community transmission; March 20 to 25, 2020), time 2 (T2; acceleration; April 15 to 20, 2020) and time 3 (T3; continued acceleration; June 25 to 30, 2020). The criteria adopted for calculating prevalence and incidence was identifying participants with scores two standard deviations above the mean compared to normative data. Stress was measured using the Perceived Stress Scale (PSS-10), depression was measured using the Filgueiras Depression Index (FDI), and anxiety was measured using the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory - State Subscale (STAI-S). Results: Initially, 89% of individuals were free of severe stress, anxiety, and depression, which dropped to 35% by T3. Prevalence of stress increased from 1.9% (95% CI [0.5, 6.8]) at T1 to 7.8% (95% CI [4.0, 14.6]) at T2, and 28.2% (95% CI [20.4, 37.5]) at T3. Depression prevalence increased from 0% (95% CI [0, 3.6]) at T1 to 23.3% (95% CI [16.2, 32.3]) at T2 and 25.2% (95% CI [17.8, 34.4]) at T3. The prevalence of severe anxiety-state symptoms increased from 10.7% (95% CI [6.1, 18.1]) at T1 to 11.7% (95% CI [6.8, 19.3]) at T2 and 45.6% (95% CI [36.3, 55.2]) at T3. Stress incidence increased by 7.8% (95% CI = [4, 14.6]) from time 1 to time 2, 23.3% (95% CI [16.2, 32.3]) from time 2 to time 3, and 26.2% (95% CI [18.7, 35.5]) from time 1 to time 3. Depression incidence increased by 23.3% (95% CI [16.2, 32.3]) from T1 to T2, 15.5 (95% CI [9.8, 23.8]) T2 to T3, and 25.2% (95% CI [17.8, 34.4]) from T1 to T3. Anxiety incidence increased by 9.7% (95% CI [5.4, 17]) from T1 to T2, 39.8% (95%CI [30.9, 49.5]) from T2 to T3, and 35.9% (95% CI [27.3, 45.5]) from T1 to T3. The severity of stress significantly increased from 16.1{+/-}8.7 at T1 to 23.5{+/-}8.4 at T2, and 30.3{+/-}6.0 at T3. Depression severity significantly increased from 48.5{+/-}20.5 at T1 to 64.7{+/-}30.2 at T2, and 75.9{+/-}26.1 at T3. Anxiety increased from 49.0{+/-}13.4 at T1 to 53.5{+/-}12.5 at T2 and 62.3{+/-}13.4 at T3. Females and individuals without comorbidities that increased COVID-19 lethality had higher anxiety scores than males and individuals with comorbidities. Age was inversely associated with mental health outcomes at baseline. Conclusion: The prevalence and severity of stress, depression, and anxiety significantly increased throughout the course of the pandemic. Anxiety seems to be sensitive to gender and risk status, where females and individuals without pre-existing comorbidities had higher anxiety by the final collection point. Depression and stress increased throughout time but were not different between genders or risk status.","Miguel Blacutt; Alberto J Filgueiras; Matthew A Stults-Kolehmainen","https://medrxiv.org/cgi/content/short/2021.09.07.21263246","20210912","","medRxiv","Undecided","","","","","","","","","","","","","False","False","","","","","False","False","False","","False","False","False","False","False","False","False","False","False","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","2021-09-13","",17890,""
"Long-term health impact of PM<inf>25</inf> under whole-year COVID-19 lockdown in China","The health impact of changes in particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter <2.5 µm (PM2.5) pollution associated with the COVID-19 lockdown has aroused great interest, but the estimation of the long-term health effects is difficult because of the lack of an annual mean air pollutant concentration under a whole-year lockdown scenario. We employed a time series decomposition method to predict the monthly PM2.5 concentrations in urban cities under permanent lockdown in 2020. The premature mortality attributable to long-term exposure to ambient PM2.5 was quantified by the risk factor model from the latest epidemiological studies. Under a whole-year lockdown scenario, annual mean PM2.5 concentrations in cites ranged from 5.4 to 68.0 µg m-3, and the national mean concentration was reduced by 32.2% compared to the 2015–2019 mean. The Global Exposure Mortality Model estimated that 837.3 (95% CI: 699.8–968.4) thousand people in Chinese cities would die prematurely from illnesses attributable to long-term exposure to ambient PM2.5. Compared to 2015–2019 mean levels, 140.2 (95% CI: 122.2–156.0) thousand premature deaths (14.4% of the annual mean deaths from 2015 to 2019) attributable to long-term exposure to PM2.5 were avoided. Because PM2.5 concentrations were still high under the whole-year lockdown scenario, the health benefit is limited, indicating that continuous emission-cutting efforts are required to reduce the health risks of air pollution. Since a similar scenario may be achieved through promotion of electric vehicles and the innovation of industrial technology in the future, the estimated long-term health impact under the whole year lockdown scenario can establish an emission–air quality–health impact linkage and provide guidance for future emission control strategies from a health protection perspective.","","https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2021.118118","20211201","","Scopus","Undecided","","","","","","","","","","","","","False","False","","","","","False","False","False","","False","False","False","False","False","False","False","False","False","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","2021-09-13","",17891,""
"Addressing psychosocial issues caused by the COVID-19 lockdown: Can urban greeneries help?","The Coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has affected over 200 countries, forcing governments to impose lockdowns to contain the spread of the disease. Although effective in reducing infection rates, the lockdowns have also resulted in a severe negative impact on mental health throughout the world; Setting the foundation for mental illnesses to become the next “silent†pandemic. This study attempts to determine a self-care method of ensuring mental health during the COVID-19 pandemic, especially for those living under lockdown. We evaluated the potential of physical exercise (in a nature setting) and nature therapy in improving mental wellbeing, among young adults with either stress, anxiety or depression symptoms. The study involved thirty subjects, who were equally divided into a nature-exercise group and a nature therapy group. The participants were briefed on the activities that they were to perform on a daily basis, and both groups performed their assigned activities concurrently for one week (27th April 2020 to 3rd May 2020) at urban greeneries accessible to them (rooftop parks, neighbourhood parks, home gardens). We used the depression, anxiety and stress scale – 21 items (DASS-21) to evaluate the mental health status of participants, once before beginning the study (baseline readings) and once at the end of the study (after a week of nature-exercise/nature therapy). There was a statistically significant reduction in stress, anxiety and depression symptoms for both the nature-exercise and nature therapy groups. However, when evaluating the effectiveness of exercise and nature therapy in treating stress, anxiety and depression symptoms on a case-by-case basis, it was discovered that nature therapy was more effective in treating mental health issues. Hence, nature therapy has the potential to be a form of preventive medicine, namely in preserving mental health during the COVID-19 crisis.","","https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2021.127340","20211101","","Scopus","Undecided","","","","","","","","","","","","","False","False","","","","","False","False","False","","False","False","False","False","False","False","False","False","False","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","2021-09-13","",17892,""
"COVID-19 pandemic: Stress, anxiety, and depression levels highest amongst indigenous peoples in Alberta","","","https://doi.org/10.3390/bs11090115","20210901","","Scopus","Undecided","","","","","","","","","","","","","False","False","","","","","False","False","False","","False","False","False","False","False","False","False","False","False","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","2021-09-13","",17893,""
"The impact of economic recessions on depression, anxiety, and trauma-related disorders and illness outcomes—A scoping review","","","https://doi.org/10.3390/bs11090119","20210901","","Scopus","Undecided","","","","","","","","","","","","","False","False","","","","","False","False","False","","False","False","False","False","False","False","False","False","False","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","2021-09-13","",17894,""
"Effect of virtual physical exercise on mental health status during the covid-19 pandemic","","","https://doi.org/10.7752/jpes.2021.s4297","20210801","","Scopus","Undecided","","","","","","","","","","","","","False","False","","","","","False","False","False","","False","False","False","False","False","False","False","False","False","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","2021-09-13","",17895,""
"The impact of covid-19 pandemic on suicide attempts in the Republic of Serbia","","","https://doi.org/10.2298/SARH210506053S","20210701","","Scopus","Undecided","","","","","","","","","","","","","False","False","","","","","False","False","False","","False","False","False","False","False","False","False","False","False","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","2021-09-13","",17896,""
"Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on mental health: Potentially vulnerable groups and comorbidities","","","https://doi.org/10.5055/JEM.0604","20210101","","Scopus","Undecided","","","","","","","","","","","","","False","False","","","","","False","False","False","","False","False","False","False","False","False","False","False","False","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","2021-09-13","",17897,""