Psychological Determinants and Consequences of COVID-19 Anxiety: A Web-Based Study in Iran

Intolerance of Uncertainty as a Situational Vulnerability Factor in the Context of the Pandemic: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of COVID-19-Related Psychological Impacts

BACKGROUND

Intolerance of uncertainty (IU) is widely accepted as a transdiagnostic vulnerability factor for a range of mental health problems. It is considered a transsituational vulnerability factor associated with a range of responses to different stressful life situations. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to examine the association between IU and specific psychological responses to the COVID-19 pandemic and the moderators of this relationship drawn from IU research and other studies on COVID-19.

METHOD

The studies included were as follows: (i) English-language articles published in peer-reviewed journals or thesis/dissertations; (ii) reporting specific psychological impacts of COVID-19; (c) reporting IU; (iii) case-control studies, prospective cohort studies, experimental studies and cross-sectional studies of large populations and (iv) reporting correlation coefficients between the variables of interest. Studies on participants with a diagnosis of neurological and/or organic impairment were excluded. The databases searched were Google Scholar, PubMed, ScienceDirect, and ProQuest, up until 31 December 2022. The risk of bias was assessed using the Risk of Bias Utilized for Surveys Tool (ROBUST, Nudelman et al., 2020). Sensitivity analysis was conducted using the one-study remove method, and studentized residuals and Cook's distance were examined. A random effects model was used.

RESULTS

We examined the association between IU and COVID-19-related psychological impacts across 85 studies from 22 countries (N = 69,997; 64.95% female; mean sample age, 32.90 ± 9.70). There was no evidence of publication bias. We found a medium and positive association between IU and COVID-19-related psychological impacts (N = 69,562, r = 0.35, k = 89, 95% CI [0.32, 0.37]), which was independent of the IU measure used or whether the psychological impact was measured in relation to the virus alone or broader aspects of the pandemic. It was also independent of severity, publication year, sample type and size, study quality, age and sample levels of anxiety, depressive symptoms, stress, mental well-being and social support. However, the observed association varied significantly between countries and country income levels (stronger among low-incomes) and across genders (stronger among males) and was stronger for measures with greater reliability and more items, but lower among samples with more people who had been exposed to COVID-19.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings support that IU is a higher order transsituational vulnerability factor related to cognitive, behavioural and distress responses during the pandemic. Limitations include English-language-only sources, reliance on a wide range of measures that were coded using a novel system and variable risk of bias across studies. The implications are considered in relation to the management of psychological consequences of major situational stressors experienced at a global scale, but the variations at a national and socioeconomic level also have implications for different or localized stressors at a regional or community level.

Effects of COVID-19 stress, proximity, and adverse childhood experiences on healthcare workers' mental health

Past research has shown that healthcare workers (HCWs) experience high levels of psychological distress during epidemics and pandemics, resulting in cascading effects that have led to chronically understaffed hospitals and healthcare centers. Due to the nature of their responsibilities and workplace stress, HCWs are among vulnerable groups especially during global health crises. During COVID-19 many healthcare workers reported greater symptoms of anxiety, depression, and COVID-19 related worries. Furthermore, adverse childhood experiences increase vulnerability for psychological conditions, especially during pandemics. This study sets out to (1) investigate the moderating effects of adverse childhood experiences on healthcare workers' COVID-19 related stressors and depression/anxiety symptoms, and (2) investigate the moderating effects of adverse childhood experiences on proximity to the COVID-19 virus and depression/anxiety symptoms. Participants included 438 employed HCWs recruited from academic medical centers and smaller healthcare agencies in northcentral Florida between October to December 2020. Mean age of participants was 38.23 (SD = 11.5) with most of the HCWs being white (72.1%), non-Hispanic (86.8%) and female (82%). Healthcare workers completed several online questionnaires, including the Adverse Childhood Experiences scale, Patient Health Questionnaire, Generalized Anxiety Disorder Scale, a COVID-19 specific worries scale, and a Social Proximity to COVID-19 scale. Healthcare workers experiencing specific COVID-19 worries reported experiencing anxiety and depressive symptoms. A significant positive interaction was seen between childhood adverse experiences globally and COVID-19 worries on anxiety symptoms. A significant positive interaction was observed between childhood maltreatment specifically and COVID-19 worries on depressive symptoms. Additionally, a positive interaction effect was seen between childhood adverse experiences and COVID-19 social proximity for both depression symptoms and anxiety symptoms. Findings from the present study indicate that adverse childhood experiences strengthen the relationship between COVID-19 worry/proximity and negative psychological symptoms. Vulnerable populations such as individuals who have experienced ACEs could benefit from targeted and specific interventions to cope with the collective trauma experienced globally due to COVID-19. As COVID-19 becomes endemic, hospital leadership and authorities should continue addressing COVID-19 worries and HCWs' psychological symptoms through mental health support and organizational interventions.

What we need to know about uncertainty in illness among people with primary malignant brain tumours: A mixed-methods systematic review

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

To identify the characteristics of uncertainty in illness (UI) among people with primary malignant brain tumours (PMBT).

BACKGROUND

High recurrence rates and complex symptoms cause uncertainty in people with PMBT. Given the characteristics of PMBT, reviewing UI among people with PMBT will benefit future research and clinical intervention development.

DESIGN

A mixed-methods systematic review.

METHODS

We performed a mixed-methods systematic review (PubMed, CINAHL, Embase, PsycINFO, Scopus and Cochrane Library), including studies on UI among people with PMBT, searched from the databases' inception to the search date. The initial search was conducted in July 2021, with an additional search in March 2022. The major search terms were PMBT and UI, and no limitations were placed on the study design. The Cochrane tool was used to evaluate the risk of bias in randomised controlled trials, and JBI checklists were used to evaluate quasi-experimental studies, survey methodology studies and a case study. This review was reported using the PRISMA 2020 checklist. Both quantitative and qualitative research data were extracted, analysed and then integrated in three stages of a mixed-methods systematic review.

RESULTS

Eleven studies were included. Due to physical, psychological and social risk factors, the UI progression of people with PMBT was complex and ambiguous, although they adapted to the PMBT diagnosis and treatment process. Subsequently, we proposed a model of UI among people with PMBT.

CONCLUSIONS

UI has multidimensional characteristics, and healthcare providers need to consider these aspects for people with PMBT.

RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE

The proposed model provides directions for nursing practice and future research. Nurses caring for people with PMBT should comprehend their UI and intervene accordingly.

PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

This review incorporated data including people with PMBT in hospitals and communities. This analysis contributes to the clinical-to-community nursing transition process for people with PMBT.

Mental Health Among Medical Students During COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background

The mental health of medical students is an issue worthy of attention, especially during COVID-19. Many studies have shown that depression and anxiety are the main problems faced by medical students. To assess the pooled prevalence of depression and anxiety among medical students worldwide, we conducted this meta-analysis.

Methods

According to PRISMA, we used a computerized strategy to search studies in EMBASE, PubMed, PsycArticles, Web of Science, and China Biology Medicine disc. The pooled prevalence of depression and anxiety was calculated by a random-effects model. Heterogeneity was explored by subgroup analysis. Sensitivity analysis and publication bias were also carried out in this meta-analysis.

Results

Of 1316 studies, 41 studies were selected based on 36608 medical students. The pooled depression prevalence was 37.9% (95% CI: 30.7-45.4%), and pooled anxiety prevalence was 33.7% (95% CI: 26.8-41.1%). The prevalence of depression and anxiety among medical students varied by gender, country, and continent.

Conclusion

The data reported that the prevalence of depression and anxiety among medical students during COVID-19 was relatively higher than those of the general population and the healthcare workers. The impact of COVID-19 on medical students and how to protect the mental health of medical students are needed to determine through further research.

Systematic Review Registration

[https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42021274015], identifier [CRD42021274015].