Abstract
Introduction: During Covid-19, high prevalence of distress was reported among students, suggesting that they may be at higher risk than the general population of developing psychological disorders in confinement situations. Methods: We conducted a systematic search of four databases (PsycINFO, PubMed, SCOPUS, and Web of Science) for articles published from January 2020 to May 2022. Risk of bias was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) checklist. Random effects meta-analyses of the reported proportions of college students with clinically significant symptoms of anxiety, depression and stress were carried out, and between-studies heterogeneity was also analysed. Results: 73 studies (N=209.761) were included for meta-analysis. The estimated proportion of college students with clinically significant short-term symptoms was 34% for anxiety (95% CI [29%,39%]; I2=99.75%), 38% for depression (95% CI [33%,44%; I2 = 99.71%), and 54% for stress (95% CI [46%,62%]; I2 = 99.57%). The estimated proportion of college students with clinically significant long term symptoms was 37% for anxiety (95% CI [32%,42%]; I2 = 97.92%), 31% for depression (95% CI [23%,41%]; I2 = 99.49%) and 41% for stress (95% CI [25%,59%]; I2 = 99.29%) were found. Several methodological and sociodemographic moderators accounted for heterogeneity in the observed prevalences. Limitations: The heterogeneity of study findings suggest that the results should be interpreted with caution. Conclusion: The current evidence shows that approximately one-third of college students experienced distress, further where we can infer that there was no worsening in mental health from a cumulative effect during the pandemic. PROSPERO: CRD420222233036.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This research has been funded by the Agency for Management of University and Research Grants (AGAUR; Autonomous Government of Catalonia) with reference code 2020PANDE00025
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
This study is a systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature whose data were extrated from published papers.
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Paper in collection COVID-19 SARS-CoV-2 preprints from medRxiv and bioRxiv
The Chan Zuckerberg Initiative, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, the Sergey Brin Family Foundation, California Institute of Technology, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Imperial College London, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Stanford University, University of Washington, and Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam.
Subject Area
Reviews and Context
0
Comment
0
TRIP Peer Reviews
0
Community Reviews
0
Automated Services
0
Blogs/Media
Author Videos