MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3022711197 · doi:10.2196/19009

Mental Health, Risk Factors, and Social Media Use During the COVID-19 Epidemic and Cordon Sanitaire Among the Community and Health Professionals in Wuhan, China: Cross-Sectional Survey

2020· article· en· W3022711197 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Michael Y. Ni, Lin Yang, Candi M C Leung, Na Li, Xiaoxin I Yao, Yishan Wang, GM Leung, Benjamin J. Cowling, Qiuyan Liao

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Mental Health · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicCOVID-19 and Mental Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnxietyPsychological interventionMental healthDepression (economics)MedicineLogistic regressionCross-sectional studyPsychiatryPublic healthChinaEnvironmental healthPsychologyNursingGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The mental health consequences of the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic, community-wide interventions, and social media use during a pandemic are unclear. The first and most draconian interventions have been implemented in Wuhan, China, and these countermeasures have been increasingly deployed by countries around the world. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to examine risk factors, including the use of social media, for probable anxiety and depression in the community and among health professionals in the epicenter, Wuhan, China. METHODS: We conducted an online survey via WeChat, the most widely used social media platform in China, which was administered to 1577 community-based adults and 214 health professionals in Wuhan. Probable anxiety and probable depression were assessed by the validated Generalized Anxiety Disorder-2 (cutoff ≥3) and Patient Health Questionnaire-2 (cutoff ≥3), respectively. A multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to examine factors associated with probable anxiety and probable depression. RESULTS: Of the 1577 community-based adults, about one-fifth of respondents reported probable anxiety (n=376, 23.84%, 95% CI 21.8-26.0) and probable depression (n=303, 19.21%, 95% CI 17.3-21.2). Similarly, of the 214 health professionals, about one-fifth of surveyed health professionals reported probable anxiety (n=47, 22.0%, 95% CI 16.6-28.1) or probable depression (n=41, 19.2%, 95% CI 14.1-25.1). Around one-third of community-based adults and health professionals spent ≥2 hours daily on COVID-19 news via social media. Close contact with individuals with COVID-19 and spending ≥2 hours daily on COVID-19 news via social media were associated with probable anxiety and depression in community-based adults. Social support was associated with less probable anxiety and depression in both health professionals and community-based adults. CONCLUSIONS: The internet could be harnessed for telemedicine and restoring daily routines, yet caution is warranted toward spending excessive time searching for COVID-19 news on social media given the infodemic and emotional contagion through online social networks. Online platforms may be used to monitor the toll of the pandemic on mental health.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.071
Threshold uncertainty score0.141

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.182
GPT teacher head0.484
Teacher spread0.302 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations474
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Mental HealthSame topicCOVID-19 and Mental HealthFrench-language works237,207