skip to main content

Title: The times, they are a-changin’: tracking shifts in mental health signals from early phase to later phase of the COVID-19 pandemic in Australia
Introduction Widespread problems of psychological distress have been observed in many countries following the outbreak of COVID-19, including Australia. What is lacking from current scholarship is a national-scale assessment that tracks the shifts in mental health during the pandemic timeline and across geographic contexts. Methods Drawing on 244 406 geotagged tweets in Australia from 1 January 2020 to 31 May 2021, we employed machine learning and spatial mapping techniques to classify, measure and map changes in the Australian public’s mental health signals, and track their change across the different phases of the pandemic in eight Australian capital cities. Results Australians’ mental health signals, quantified by sentiment scores, have a shift from pessimistic (early pandemic) to optimistic (middle pandemic), reflected by a 174.1% (95% CI 154.8 to 194.5) increase in sentiment scores. However, the signals progressively recessed towards a more pessimistic outlook (later pandemic) with a decrease in sentiment scores by 48.8% (95% CI 34.7 to 64.9). Such changes in mental health signals vary across capital cities. Conclusion We set out a novel empirical framework using social media to systematically classify, measure, map and track the mental health of a nation. Our approach is designed in a manner that can readily be more » augmented into an ongoing monitoring capacity and extended to other nations. Tracking locales where people are displaying elevated levels of pessimistic mental health signals provide important information for the smart deployment of finite mental health services. This is especially critical in a time of crisis during which resources are stretched beyond normal bounds. « less
Authors:
; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;
Award ID(s):
2028791
Publication Date:
NSF-PAR ID:
10345865
Journal Name:
BMJ Global Health
Volume:
7
Issue:
1
Page Range or eLocation-ID:
e007081
ISSN:
2059-7908
Sponsoring Org:
National Science Foundation
More Like this
  1. Abstract Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) the causal agent for COVID-19, is a communicable disease spread through close contact. It is known to disproportionately impact certain communities due to both biological susceptibility and inequitable exposure. In this study, we investigate the most important health, social, and environmental factors impacting the early phases (before July, 2020) of per capita COVID-19 transmission and per capita all-cause mortality in US counties. We aggregate county-level physical and mental health, environmental pollution, access to health care, demographic characteristics, vulnerable population scores, and other epidemiological data to create a large feature set to analyze per capita COVID-19 outcomes. Because of the high-dimensionality, multicollinearity, and unknown interactions of the data, we use ensemble machine learning and marginal prediction methods to identify the most salient factors associated with several COVID-19 outbreak measure. Our variable importance results show that measures of ethnicity, public transportation and preventable diseases are the strongest predictors for both per capita COVID-19 incidence and mortality. Specifically, the CDC measures for minority populations, CDC measures for limited English, and proportion of Black- and/or African-American individuals in a county were the most important features for per capita COVID-19 cases within a month after the pandemicmore »started in a county and also at the latest date examined. For per capita all-cause mortality at day 100 and total to date, we find that public transportation use and proportion of Black- and/or African-American individuals in a county are the strongest predictors. The methods predict that, keeping all other factors fixed, a 10% increase in public transportation use, all other factors remaining fixed at the observed values, is associated with increases mortality at day 100 of 2012 individuals (95% CI [1972, 2356]) and likewise a 10% increase in the proportion of Black- and/or African-American individuals in a county is associated with increases total deaths at end of study of 2067 (95% CI [1189, 2654]). Using data until the end of study, the same metric suggests ethnicity has double the association as the next most important factors, which are location, disease prevalence, and transit factors. Our findings shed light on societal patterns that have been reported and experienced in the U.S. by using robust methods to understand the features most responsible for transmission and sectors of society most vulnerable to infection and mortality. In particular, our results provide evidence of the disproportionate impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on minority populations. Our results suggest that mitigation measures, including how vaccines are distributed, could have the greatest impact if they are given with priority to the highest risk communities.« less
  2. Objective:

    The COVID-19 pandemic has put unprecedented stress on essential workers and their children. Limited cross-sectional research has found increases in mental health conditions from workload, reduced income, and isolation among essential workers. Less research has been conducted on children of essential workers. We examined trends in the crisis response of essential workers and their children from April 2020 through August 2021.

    Methods:

    We investigated the impact during 3 periods of the pandemic on workers and their children using anonymized data from the Crisis Text Line on crisis help-seeking texts for thoughts of suicide or active suicidal ideation (desire, intent, capability, time frame), abuse (emotional, physical, sexual, unspecified), anxiety/stress, grief, depression, isolation, bullying, eating or body image, gender/sexual identity, self-harm, and substance use. We used generalized estimating equations to study the longitudinal change in crisis response across the later stages of the pandemic using adjusted odds ratios (aORs) for worker status and crisis outcomes.

    Results:

    Results demonstrated higher odds of crisis outcomes for thoughts of suicide (aOR = 1.06; 95% CI, 1.00-1.12) and suicide capability (aOR = 1.14; 95% CI, 1.02-1.27) among essential workers than among nonessential workers. Children of essential workers had higher odds of substance use than children of nonessential workersmore »(aOR = 1.33; 95% CI, 1.08-1.65), particularly for Indigenous American children (aOR = 2.76; 95% CI, 1.35-5.36). Essential workers (aOR = 1.17; 95% CI, 1.07-1.27) and their children (aOR = 1.18; 95% CI, 1.07-1.30) had higher odds of grief than nonessential workers and their children.

    Conclusion:

    Essential workers and their children had elevated crisis outcomes. Immediate and low-cost psychologically supportive interventions are needed to mitigate the mental health impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on these populations.

    « less
  3. Abstract Background Cross-sectional studies have found that the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has negatively affected population-level mental health. Longitudinal studies are necessary to examine trajectories of change in mental health over time and identify sociodemographic groups at risk for persistent distress. Purpose To examine the trajectories of mental distress between March 10 and August 4, 2020, a key period during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods Participants included 6,901 adults from the nationally representative Understanding America Study, surveyed at baseline between March 10 and 31, 2020, with nine follow-up assessments between April 1 and August 4, 2020. Mixed-effects logistic regression was used to examine the association between date and self-reported mental distress (measured with the four-item Patient Health Questionnaire) among U.S. adults overall and among sociodemographic subgroups defined by sex, age, race/ethnicity, household structure, federal poverty line, and census region. Results Compared to March 11, the odds of mental distress among U.S. adults overall were 1.84 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.65–2.07) times higher on April 1 and 1.92 (95% CI = 1.62–2.28) times higher on May 1; by August 1, the odds of mental distress had returned to levels comparable to March 11 (odds ratio [OR] = 0.80, 95% CImore »= 0.66–0.96). Females experienced a sharper increase in mental distress between March and May compared to males (females: OR = 2.29, 95% CI = 1.85–2.82; males: OR = 1.53, 95% CI = 1.15–2.02). Conclusions These findings highlight the trajectory of mental health symptoms during an unprecedented pandemic, including the identification of populations at risk for sustained mental distress.« less
  4. Abstract Background

    The Mexican Institute of Social Security (IMSS) is the largest health care provider in Mexico, covering about 48% of the Mexican population. In this report, we describe the epidemiological patterns related to confirmed cases, hospitalizations, intubations, and in-hospital mortality due to COVID-19 and associated factors, during five epidemic waves recorded in the IMSS surveillance system.

    Methods

    We analyzed COVID-19 laboratory-confirmed cases from the Online Epidemiological Surveillance System (SINOLAVE) from March 29th, 2020, to August 27th, 2022. We constructed weekly epidemic curves describing temporal patterns of confirmed cases and hospitalizations by age, gender, and wave. We also estimated hospitalization, intubation, and hospital case fatality rates. The mean days of in-hospital stay and hospital admission delay were calculated across five pandemic waves. Logistic regression models were employed to assess the association between demographic factors, comorbidities, wave, and vaccination and the risk of severe disease and in-hospital death.

    Results

    A total of 3,396,375 laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 cases were recorded across the five waves. The introduction of rapid antigen testing at the end of 2020 increased detection and modified epidemiological estimates. Overall, 11% (95% CI 10.9, 11.1) of confirmed cases were hospitalized, 20.6% (95% CI 20.5, 20.7) of the hospitalized cases were intubated, and the hospitalmore »case fatality rate was 45.1% (95% CI 44.9, 45.3). The mean in-hospital stay was 9.11 days, and patients were admitted on average 5.07 days after symptoms onset. The most recent waves dominated by the Omicron variant had the highest incidence. Hospitalization, intubation, and mean hospitalization days decreased during subsequent waves. The in-hospital case fatality rate fluctuated across waves, reaching its highest value during the second wave in winter 2020. A notable decrease in hospitalization was observed primarily among individuals ≥ 60 years. The risk of severe disease and death was positively associated with comorbidities, age, and male gender; and declined with later waves and vaccination status.

    Conclusion

    During the five pandemic waves, we observed an increase in the number of cases and a reduction in severity metrics. During the first three waves, the high in-hospital fatality rate was associated with hospitalization practices for critical patients with comorbidities.

    « less
  5. Abstract STUDY QUESTION To what extent does the use of mobile computing apps to track the menstrual cycle and the fertile window influence fecundability among women trying to conceive? SUMMARY ANSWER After adjusting for potential confounders, use of any of several different apps was associated with increased fecundability ranging from 12% to 20% per cycle of attempt. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY Many women are using mobile computing apps to track their menstrual cycle and the fertile window, including while trying to conceive. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION The Pregnancy Study Online (PRESTO) is a North American prospective internet-based cohort of women who are aged 21–45 years, trying to conceive and not using contraception or fertility treatment at baseline. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS We restricted the analysis to 8363 women trying to conceive for no more than 6 months at baseline; the women were recruited from June 2013 through May 2019. Women completed questionnaires at baseline and every 2 months for up to 1 year. The main outcome was fecundability, i.e. the per-cycle probability of conception, which we assessed using self-reported data on time to pregnancy (confirmed by positive home pregnancy test) in menstrual cycles. On the baseline and follow-up questionnaires, women reportedmore »whether they used mobile computing apps to track their menstrual cycles (‘cycle apps’) and, if so, which one(s). We estimated fecundability ratios (FRs) for the use of cycle apps, adjusted for female age, race/ethnicity, prior pregnancy, BMI, income, current smoking, education, partner education, caffeine intake, use of hormonal contraceptives as the last method of contraception, hours of sleep per night, cycle regularity, use of prenatal supplements, marital status, intercourse frequency and history of subfertility. We also examined the impact of concurrent use of fertility indicators: basal body temperature, cervical fluid, cervix position and/or urine LH. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE Among 8363 women, 6077 (72.7%) were using one or more cycle apps at baseline. A total of 122 separate apps were reported by women. We designated five of these apps before analysis as more likely to be effective (Clue, Fertility Friend, Glow, Kindara, Ovia; hereafter referred to as ‘selected apps’). The use of any app at baseline was associated with 20% increased fecundability, with little difference between selected apps versus other apps (selected apps FR (95% CI): 1.20 (1.13, 1.28); all other apps 1.21 (1.13, 1.30)). In time-varying analyses, cycle app use was associated with 12–15% increased fecundability (selected apps FR (95% CI): 1.12 (1.04, 1.21); all other apps 1.15 (1.07, 1.24)). When apps were used at baseline with one or more fertility indicators, there was higher fecundability than without fertility indicators (selected apps with indicators FR (95% CI): 1.23 (1.14, 1.34) versus without indicators 1.17 (1.05, 1.30); other apps with indicators 1.30 (1.19, 1.43) versus without indicators 1.16 (1.06, 1.27)). In time-varying analyses, results were similar when stratified by time trying at study entry (<3 vs. 3–6 cycles) or cycle regularity. For use of the selected apps, we observed higher fecundability among women with a history of subfertility: FR 1.33 (1.05–1.67). LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION Neither regularity nor intensity of app use was ascertained. The prospective time-varying assessment of app use was based on questionnaires completed every 2 months, which would not capture more frequent changes. Intercourse frequency was also reported retrospectively and we do not have data on timing of intercourse relative to the fertile window. Although we controlled for a wide range of covariates, we cannot exclude the possibility of residual confounding (e.g. choosing to use an app in this observational study may be a marker for unmeasured health habits promoting fecundability). Half of the women in the study received a free premium subscription for one of the apps (Fertility Friend), which may have increased the overall prevalence of app use in the time-varying analyses, but would not affect app use at baseline. Most women in the study were college educated, which may limit application of results to other populations. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS Use of a cycle app, especially in combination with observation of one or more fertility indicators (basal body temperature, cervical fluid, cervix position and/or urine LH), may increase fecundability (per-cycle pregnancy probability) by about 12–20% for couples trying to conceive. We did not find consistent evidence of improved fecundability resulting from use of one specific app over another. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S) This research was supported by grants, R21HD072326 and R01HD086742, from the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, USA. In the last 3 years, Dr L.A.W. has served as a fibroid consultant for AbbVie.com. Dr L.A.W. has also received in-kind donations from Sandstone Diagnostics, Swiss Precision Diagnostics, FertilityFriend.com and Kindara.com for primary data collection and participant incentives in the PRESTO cohort. Dr J.B.S. reports personal fees from Swiss Precision Diagnostics, outside the submitted work. The remaining authors have nothing to declare. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER N/A.« less