68 research outputs found

    Intergenerational socioeconomic mobility and adult depression:the CONSTANCES study

    Get PDF
    Socioeconomic mobility from childhood onwards may predict depression risk in adulthood. Using data from the nationally representative CONSTANCES study in France (2012-2014, n=67,057), we assessed the relationship between intergenerational socioeconomic mobility and adult depression (Center for Epidemiological Studies-Depression scale, >=16 in men, >=20 in women) and antidepressant use. Socioeconomic position was ascertained by occupational grade (childhood: maternal and paternal measures prior to age 15 years combined; adult: participant own). Data were analyzed using logistic regression models adjusted for sociodemographic characteristics, parental history of psychiatric disorders and suicide, health behaviors and chronic health problems. Compared to participants who had persistently high socioeconomic circumstances, those who experienced other socioeconomic trajectories had elevated levels of depression (multivariate Odds Ratios: upward mobility: 1.21, intermediate socioeconomic position: 1.28, downward mobility: 1.66, persistently low socioeconomic position: 1.82). Downward mobility and persistently low socioeconomic position were also associated with elevated odds of antidepressant use (multivariate Odds Ratios: 1.24 and 1.36 respectively). In supplementary analyses, socioeconomic mobility was more strongly associated with depression in women than in men and in younger participants (18-29 years) than other age groups. Factors that contribute to depression risk and socioeconomic inequalities in this area appear at play already in childhood; this should be acknowledged by clinicians and policymakers

    Understanding the protective effect of social support on depression symptomatology from a longitudinal network perspective

    Get PDF
    Background: Higher social support protects people from developing mental disorders. Limited evidence is available on the mechanism through which social support plays this protective role. Objective: To investigate the stress-buffering process of social support on depressive symptoms using a novel longitudinal dynamic symptom network approach. Methods: A total of 4242 adult participants who completed the first two waves (from May to October 2020) of the International Covid Mental Health Survey were included in the study. Cross-lagged panel network modelling was used to estimate a longitudinal network of self-reported social support, loneliness and depressive symptoms. Standardised regression coefficients from regularised cross-lagged regressions were estimated as edge weights of the network. Findings: The results support a unidirectional protective effect of social support on key depressive symptoms, partly mediated through loneliness: A higher number of close confidants and accessible practical help was associated with decreased anhedonia (weight=−0.033) and negative self-appraisal symptoms (weight=−0.038). Support from others was also negatively associated with loneliness, which in turn associated with decreased depressed mood (weight=0.086) and negative self-appraisal (weight=0.077). We identified a greater number of direct relationships from social support to depressive symptoms among men compared with women. Also, the edge weights from social support to depression were generally stronger in the men’s network. Conclusions: Reductions in negative self-appraisal might function as a bridge between social support and other depressive symptoms, and, thus, it may have amplified the protective effect of social support. Men appear to benefit more from social support than women. Clinical implications: Building community-based support networks to deliver practical support, and loneliness reduction components are critical for depression prevention interventions after stressful experiences

    Symptoms of anxiety and depression during the COVID-19 pandemic in six European countries and Australia – Differences by prior mental disorders and migration status

    Full text link
    Background: Little is known about changes of mental health during the COVID-19 pandemic in potentially disadvantaged groups. We investigated changes in anxiety and depression symptoms during the first year of the pandemic in six European countries and Australia by prior mental disorders and migration status. Methods: Overall, 4674 adults answered a web-based survey in May-June 2020 and were followed by three repeated surveys up to February 2021. Information on psychosocial, financial and demographic, living conditions, prior mental disorders, depression and anxiety symptoms during the pandemic and migration status was collected. Weighted general estimation equations modelling was used to investigate the association between prior mental disorders, migration status, and symptoms over time. Results: Most participants were <40 years old (48%), women (78%) and highly educated (62%). The baseline prevalence of depressive and anxiety symptoms ranged between 19%-45% and 13%-35%, respectively. In most countries, prevalence rates remained unchanged throughout the pandemic and were higher among people with prior mental disorders than without even after adjustment for several factors. We observed interactions between previous mental disorders and symptoms of anxiety or depression over time in two countries. No difference by migration status was noted. Limitations: Convenience sampling limits generalizability. Self-assessed symptoms of depression and anxiety might involve some misclassification. Conclusions: Depression and anxiety symptoms were worse among individuals with prior mental disorders than without, but there was no clear trend of worsening mental health in the observed groups during the observed period

    Symptoms of anxiety and depression during the COVID-19 pandemic in six European countries and Australia - Differences by prior mental disorders and migration status

    Get PDF
    Background: Little is known about changes of mental health during the COVID-19 pandemic in potentially disadvantaged groups. We investigated changes in anxiety and depression symptoms during the first year of the pandemic in six European countries and Australia by prior mental disorders and migration status. Methods: Overall, 4674 adults answered a web-based survey in May-June 2020 and were followed by three repeated surveys up to February 2021. Information on psychosocial, financial and demographic, living conditions, prior mental disorders, depression and anxiety symptoms during the pandemic and migration status was collected. Weighted general estimation equations modelling was used to investigate the association between prior mental disorders, migration status, and symptoms over time. Results: Most participants were &lt;40 years old (48%), women (78%) and highly educated (62%). The baseline prevalence of depressive and anxiety symptoms ranged between 19%-45% and 13%-35%, respectively. In most countries, prevalence rates remained unchanged throughout the pandemic and were higher among people with prior mental disorders than without even after adjustment for several factors. We observed interactions between previous mental disorders and symptoms of anxiety or depression over time in two countries. No difference by migration status was noted. Limitations: Convenience sampling limits generalizability. Self-assessed symptoms of depression and anxiety might involve some misclassification. Conclusions: Depression and anxiety symptoms were worse among individuals with prior mental disorders than without, but there was no clear trend of worsening mental health in the observed groups during the observed period

    Effectiveness of a stepped-care programme of internet-based psychological interventions for healthcare workers with psychological distress: Study protocol for the RESPOND healthcare workers randomised controlled trial

    Full text link
    The dataset that supports the findings of this study are archived in the Universidad Autónoma de Madrid data repository e‐cienciaDatos in https://doi.org/10.21950/HN1HNOBackground and aims: The coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic has challenged health services worldwide, with a worsening of healthcare workers’ mental health within initial pandemic hotspots. In early 2022, the Omicron variant is spreading rapidly around the world. This study explores the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a stepped-care programme of scalable, internet-based psychological interventions for distressed health workers on self-reported anxiety and depression symptoms. Methods: We present the study protocol for a multicentre (two sites), parallel-group (1:1 allocation ratio), analyst-blinded, superiority, randomised controlled trial. Healthcare workers with psychological distress will be allocated either to care as usual only or to care as usual plus a stepped-care programme that includes two scalable psychological interventions developed by the World Health Organization: A guided self-help stress management guide (Doing What Matters in Times of Stress) and a five-session cognitive behavioural intervention (Problem Management Plus). All participants will receive a single-session emotional support intervention, namely psychological first aid. We will include 212 participants. An intention-to-treat analysis using linear mixed models will be conducted to explore the programme's effect on anxiety and depression symptoms, as measured by the Patient Health Questionnaire – Anxiety and Depression Scale summary score at 21 weeks from baseline. Secondary outcomes include post-traumatic stress disorder symptoms, resilience, quality of life, cost impact and cost-effectiveness. Conclusions: This study is the first randomised trial that combines two World Health Organization psychological interventions tailored for health workers into one stepped-care programme. Results will inform occupational and mental health prevention, treatment, and recovery strategies. Registration details: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04980326The RESPOND project was funded under Horizon 2020 -the Framework Programme for Research and Innovation (2014– 2020) (grant number: 101016127), and the work of MF-N was supported by a postdoctoral fellowship of the ISCIII (CD20/ 00036

    Understanding the protective effect of social support on depression symptomatology from a longitudinal network perspective

    Get PDF
    Background Higher social support protects people from developing mental disorders. Limited evidence is available on the mechanism through which social support plays this protective role. Objective To investigate the stress-buffering process of social support on depressive symptoms using a novel longitudinal dynamic symptom network approach. Methods A total of 4242 adult participants who completed the first two waves (from May to October 2020) of the International Covid Mental Health Survey were included in the study. Cross-lagged panel network modelling was used to estimate a longitudinal network of self-reported social support, loneliness and depressive symptoms. Standardised regression coefficients from regularised cross-lagged regressions were estimated as edge weights of the network. Findings The results support a unidirectional protective effect of social support on key depressive symptoms, partly mediated through loneliness: A higher number of close confidants and accessible practical help was associated with decreased anhedonia (weight=−0.033) and negative self-appraisal symptoms (weight=−0.038). Support from others was also negatively associated with loneliness, which in turn associated with decreased depressed mood (weight=0.086) and negative self-appraisal (weight=0.077). We identified a greater number of direct relationships from social support to depressive symptoms among men compared with women. Also, the edge weights from social support to depression were generally stronger in the men’s network. Conclusions Reductions in negative self-appraisal might function as a bridge between social support and other depressive symptoms, and, thus, it may have amplified the protective effect of social support. Men appear to benefit more from social support than women. Clinical implications Building community-based support networks to deliver practical support, and loneliness reduction components are critical for depression prevention interventions after stressful experiences

    Understanding the protective effect of social support on depression symptomatology from a longitudinal network perspective

    Get PDF
    Background: Higher social support protects people from developing mental disorders. Limited evidence is available on the mechanism through which social support plays this protective role. Objective: To investigate the stress-buffering process of social support on depressive symptoms using a novel longitudinal dynamic symptom network approach. Methods: A total of 4242 adult participants who completed the first two waves (from May to October 2020) of the International Covid Mental Health Survey were included in the study. Cross-lagged panel network modelling was used to estimate a longitudinal network of self-reported social support, loneliness and depressive symptoms. Standardised regression coefficients from regularised cross-lagged regressions were estimated as edge weights of the network. Findings: The results support a unidirectional protective effect of social support on key depressive symptoms, partly mediated through loneliness: A higher number of close confidants and accessible practical help was associated with decreased anhedonia (weight=-0.033) and negative self-appraisal symptoms (weight=-0.038). Support from others was also negatively associated with loneliness, which in turn associated with decreased depressed mood (weight=0.086) and negative self-appraisal (weight=0.077). We identified a greater number of direct relationships from social support to depressive symptoms among men compared with women. Also, the edge weights from social support to depression were generally stronger in the men's network. Conclusions: Reductions in negative self-appraisal might function as a bridge between social support and other depressive symptoms, and, thus, it may have amplified the protective effect of social support. Men appear to benefit more from social support than women. Clinical implications: Building community-based support networks to deliver practical support, and loneliness reduction components are critical for depression prevention interventions after stressful experiences

    Resilience of people with chronic medical conditions during the COVID-19 pandemic: a 1-year longitudinal prospective survey

    Get PDF
    Backgrounds: Individuals with chronic medical conditions are considered highly exposed to COVID-19 pandemic stress, but emerging evidence is demonstrating that resilience is common even among them. We aimed at identifying sustained resilient outcomes and their predictors in chronically ill people during the first year of the pandemic. Methods: This international 4-wave 1-year longitudinal online survey included items on socio-demographic characteristics, economic and living situation, lifestyle and habits, pandemic-related issues, and history of mental disorders. Adherence to and approval of imposed restrictions, trust in governments and in scientific community during the pandemic were also investigated. The following tools were administered: the Patient Health Questionnaire, the Generalized Anxiety Disorder scale, the PTSD Checklist DSM-5, the Oslo Social Support Scale, the Padua Inventory, and the Portrait Values Questionnaire. Results: One thousand fifty-two individuals reporting a chronic condition out of 8011 total participants from 13 countries were included in the study, and 965 had data available for the final model. The estimated probability of being "sustained-resilient" was 34%. Older male individuals, participants employed before and during the pandemic or with perceived social support were more likely to belong to the sustained-resilience group. Loneliness, a previous mental disorder, high hedonism, fear of COVID-19 contamination, concern for the health of loved ones, and non-approving pandemic restrictions were predictors of not-resilient outcomes in our sample. Conclusions: We found similarities and differences from established predictors of resilience and identified some new ones specific to pandemics. Further investigation is warranted and could inform the design of resilience-building interventions in people with chronic diseases

    Resilience of people with chronic medical conditions during the COVID-19 pandemic: a 1-year longitudinal prospective survey

    Get PDF
    Backgrounds: Individuals with chronic medical conditions are considered highly exposed to COVID-19 pandemic stress, but emerging evidence is demonstrating that resilience is common even among them. We aimed at identifying sustained resilient outcomes and their predictors in chronically ill people during the first year of the pandemic. Methods: This international 4-wave 1-year longitudinal online survey included items on socio-demographic characteristics, economic and living situation, lifestyle and habits, pandemic-related issues, and history of mental disorders. Adherence to and approval of imposed restrictions, trust in governments and in scientific community during the pandemic were also investigated. The following tools were administered: the Patient Health Questionnaire, the Generalized Anxiety Disorder scale, the PTSD Checklist DSM-5, the Oslo Social Support Scale, the Padua Inventory, and the Portrait Values Questionnaire. Results: One thousand fifty-two individuals reporting a chronic condition out of 8011 total participants from 13 countries were included in the study, and 965 had data available for the final model. The estimated probability of being “sustained-resilient” was 34%. Older male individuals, participants employed before and during the pandemic or with perceived social support were more likely to belong to the sustained-resilience group. Loneliness, a previous mental disorder, high hedonism, fear of COVID-19 contamination, concern for the health of loved ones, and non-approving pandemic restrictions were predictors of not-resilient outcomes in our sample. Conclusions: We found similarities and differences from established predictors of resilience and identified some new ones specific to pandemics. Further investigation is warranted and could inform the design of resilience-building interventions in people with chronic diseases
    corecore