RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Comparison of Mental Health Symptoms Prior to and During COVID-19: Evidence from a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of 134 Cohorts
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2021.05.10.21256920
DO 10.1101/2021.05.10.21256920
A1 Sun, Ying
A1 Wu, Yin
A1 Fan, Suiqiong
A1 Santo, Tiffany Dal
A1 Li, Letong
A1 Jiang, Xiaowen
A1 Li, Kexin
A1 Wang, Yutong
A1 Tasleem, Amina
A1 Krishnan, Ankur
A1 He, Chen
A1 Bonardi, Olivia
A1 Boruff, Jill T.
A1 Rice, Danielle B.
A1 Markham, Sarah
A1 Levis, Brooke
A1 Azar, Marleine
A1 Thombs-Vite, Ian
A1 Neupane, Dipika
A1 Agic, Branka
A1 Fahim, Christine
A1 Martin, Michael S.
A1 Sockalingam, Sanjeev
A1 Turecki, Gustavo
A1 Benedetti, Andrea
A1 Thombs, Brett D.
YR 2022
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/11/16/2021.05.10.21256920.abstract
AB Objectives The rapid pace, high volume, and limited quality of mental health evidence that has been generated during COVID-19 poses a barrier to understanding mental health outcomes. We sought to summarize results from studies that compared mental health outcomes during COVID-19 to outcomes assessed prior to COVID-19 in the same cohort in the general population and in other groups for which data have been reported.Design Living systematic review.Data Sources MEDLINE (Ovid), PsycINFO (Ovid), CINAHL (EBSCO), EMBASE (Ovid), Web of Science Core Collection: Citation Indexes, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang, medRxiv (preprints), and Open Science Framework Preprints (preprint server aggregator).Eligibility criteria for selecting studies For this report, we included studies that compared general mental health, anxiety symptoms, or depression symptoms, assessed January 1, 2020 or later, to the same outcomes collected between January 1, 2018 and December 31, 2019. Any population was eligible. We required ≥ 90% of participants pre-COVID-19 and during COVID-19 to be the same or the use of statistical methods to address missing data. For population groups with continuous outcomes for at least two studies in an outcome domain, we conducted restricted maximum-likelihood random-effects meta-analyses. Worse COVID-19 mental health outcomes are reported as positive. Risk of bias of included studies was assessed using an adapted version of the Joanna Briggs Institute Checklist for Prevalence Studies.Results As of April 11, 2022, we had reviewed 94,411 unique titles and abstracts and identified 137 unique eligible studies with data from 134 cohorts. Almost all studies were from high-income (105, 77%) or upper-middle income (28, 20%) countries. Among adult general population studies, we did not find changes in general mental health (standardized mean difference of change [SMDchange = 0.11, 95% CI -0.00 to 0.22) or anxiety symptoms (SMDchange = 0.05, 95% CI -0.04 to 0.13), but depression symptoms worsened minimally (SMDchange = 0.12, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.24). Among women or females, mental health symptoms worsened by minimal to small amounts in general mental health (SMDchange = 0.22, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.35), anxiety symptoms (SMDchange = 0.20, 95% CI 0.12 to 0.29), and depression symptoms (SMDchange = 0.22, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.40). Of 27 other analyses across outcome domains, among subgroups other than women or females, 5 analyses suggested minimal or small amounts of symptom worsening, and 2 suggested minimal or small symptom improvements. No other subgroup experienced statistically significant changes across outcome domains. In the 3 studies with data from March to April 2020 and later in 2020, symptoms either were unchanged from pre-COVID-19 at both time points or increased initially then returned to pre-COVID-19 levels. Heterogeneity measured by the I2 statistic was high (e.g., > 80%) for most analyses, and there was concerning risk of bias in most studies.Conclusions High risk of bias in many studies and substantial heterogeneity suggest that point estimates should be interpreted cautiously. Nonetheless, there was general consistency across analyses in that most symptom change estimates were close to zero and not statistically significant, and changes that were identified were of minimal to small magnitudes. There were, however, small negative changes for women or females in all domains. It is possible that gaps in data have not allowed identification of changes in some vulnerable groups. Continued updating is needed as evidence accrues.Funding: Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CMS-171703; MS1-173070; GA4-177758; WI2-179944); McGill Interdisciplinary Initiative in Infection and Immunity Emergency COVID-19 Research Fund (R2-42).Registration: PROSPERO (CRD42020179703); registered on April 17, 2020.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementThe study was funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research and McGill Interdisciplinary Initiative in Infection and Immunity Emergency COVID Research Fund. YWu and BL were supported by a Fonds de recherche du Quebec Sante (FRQS) Postdoctoral Training Fellowship. TDS was supported by a Canadian Institutes of Health Research Masters Award, DBR was supported by a Vanier Canada Graduate Scholarship, AB was supported by FRQS senior researcher salary awards, and BDT was supported by a Tier 1 Canada Research Chair, all outside of the present work.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:As this study was a systematic review of published results, it did not require ethical approval.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.YesI 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).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesAll data used in the study are available in the manuscript and its tables or on online at https://www.depressd.ca/covid-19-mental-health.https://www.depressd.ca/covid-19-mental-health.