Search

Aims: The Covid-19 pandemic has had a substantial impact on the mental health of the general public and high-risk groups across the globe. Southeast Asia, one of the first regions to be affected by the outbreak, is of particular interest given its proximity and close links to China, experience with recent epidemics (i.e. SARS), and the variable course of the outbreak in the region thus far. The aim of this study was to systemically review and assess the prevalence of anxiety, depression and insomnia symptoms in the general adult population, frontline and general healthcare workers (HCWs), and adult students in Southeast Asia during the course of the first year of the Covid-19 pandemic. Methods: Several literature databases (PubMed, Embase, PsycINFO, Web of Science, and medRxiv) were systemically searched for articles published up to February 2021. Two reviewers independently evaluated all the relevant studies using pre-determined criteria and assessed the risk of bias for each included study. The prevalence rates of mental health symptoms were estimated using a random-effect meta-analysis model. Results: In total, 32 samples from 25 studies with 20,352 participants were included. Anxiety symptoms was assessed in all 25 studies and depressive symptoms in 15 studies with pooled prevalence rates of 22% and 16% respectively. Only two studies evaluated insomnia, whose prevalence was estimated to be 19%. The overall prevalence of mental health disorders was similar amongst frontline HCWs (18%), general HCWs (17%), and students (20%) whilst being noticeably higher in the general population (27%). Conclusions: The results indicate that a considerable proportion of participants report the presence of anxiety, depression and insomnia symptoms. However, the pooled prevalence rates in Southeast Asia are significantly lower than those reported in other meta-analyses from other areas such as China and Europe. This meta-analysis may provide valuable evidence for more targeted identification of mental health needs and guide future research of long-term outcomes. Keywords: meta-analysis; Covid-19; mental health; pandemic; general population; healthcare workers; students; anxiety; depression; insomnia

Aims There is a lack of evidence related to the prevalence of mental health symptoms as well as their heterogeneities during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic in Latin America, a large area spanning the equator. The current study aims to provide meta-analytical evidence on mental health symptoms during COVID-19 among frontline healthcare workers, general healthcare workers, the general population and university students in Latin America. Methods Bibliographical databases, such as PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, PsycINFO and medRxiv, were systematically searched to identify pertinent studies up to August 13, 2021. Two coders performed the screening using predefined eligibility criteria. Studies were assigned quality scores using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. The double data extraction method was used to minimise data entry errors. Results A total of 62 studies with 196 950 participants in Latin America were identified. The pooled prevalence of anxiety, depression, distress and insomnia was 35%, 35%, 32% and 35%, respectively. There was a higher prevalence of mental health symptoms in South America compared to Central America (36% v. 28%, p < 0.001), in countries speaking Portuguese (40%) v. Spanish (30%). The pooled prevalence of mental health symptoms in the general population, general healthcare workers, frontline healthcare workers and students in Latin America was 37%, 34%, 33% and 45%, respectively. Conclusions The high yet heterogenous level of prevalence of mental health symptoms emphasises the need for appropriate identification of psychological interventions in Latin America.

This research includes two studies testing whether the Health Belief Model (HBM) constructs predict tobacco use intentions differently between heterosexual and lesbian, gay, and bisexual (LGB) people. Focusing on cigarette smoking, Study 1 (n = 1808 U.S. adult current smokers) found that the perceived health threat and perceived benefits of smoking differently predicted intentions to continue smoking between heterosexual and LGB smokers. The perceived health threat of smoking had a weaker negative relationship and perceived benefits of smoking had a stronger positive relationship with smoking intentions among LGB smokers than heterosexual smokers. Focusing on vaping, Study 2 (n = 2801 U.S. adults) found that the perceived health threat and perceived barriers of vaping differentially predicted vaping intentions between heterosexual and LGB individuals. The perceived health threat of vaping only negatively predicted vaping intentions among heterosexual people. Perceived barriers to vaping had a stronger negative relationship with intentions to vape among LGB people than among heterosexual people. Our finding suggests that compared to perceptions of tobacco-related health consequences (perceived heath threat), behavioral perceptions (perceived benefits and barriers) may have stronger impacts on tobacco use intentions among LGB people. Thus, efforts focusing on reducing tobacco-related disparities among the LGB community should address perceived benefits and barriers of tobacco use.