Social, Financial and Psychological Stress during an Emerging Pandemic: Observations from a Population Web-Based Survey in the acute phase of the COVID-19 pandemic
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Understanding the multifaceted impacts of the Coronavirus-19 (COVID-19) outbreak as it unfolds is crucial to identify the most critical needs and to inform targeted interventions. Methods This population survey study presents cohort characteristics and baseline observations linked to the acute-mid phase of the COVID-19 outbreak in terms of perceived threats and concerns, occupational and financial impacts, social impacts and stress as measured by the Cohen’s Perceived Stress Scale (PSS) collected cross-sectionally between April 3 and May 15, 2020. A multivariate linear regression model was used to identify factors associated with stress changes relative to pre-outbreak estimates. Findings 6,040/6,685 (90·4%) participants filled out at least 1/3 of the survey and were included in the analyses. On average, PSS scores increased from 12·9+6·8 before the outbreak to 14·9+8·3 during the outbreak (p<0·001). The independent factors associated with stress worsening were: having a mental disorder, female sex, having underage children, heavier alcohol consumption, working with the general public, shorter sleep duration, younger age, less time elapsed since the start of the outbreak, lower stress before the outbreak, worse symptoms that could be linked to COVID-19, lower coping skills, worse obsessive-compulsive symptoms related to germs and contamination, personalities loading on extraversion, conscientiousness and neuroticism, left wing political views, worse family relationships, and spending less time exercising and doing artistic activities. Interpretation Cross-sectional analyses showed a significant increase from average low to moderate stress during the COVID-19 outbreak. Identified modifiable factors associated with an increase in stress may be informative for intervention development.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".