The impact of provincial lockdown policies and <scp>COVID</scp>‐19 case and mortality rates on anxiety in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: COVID-19 has had significant mental health impacts internationally and anxiety rates are estimated to have tripled during the pandemic, but the specific causes remain underexplored. This study's purpose was to investigate the associations of sociodemographic factors, COVID-19-related policies, and COVID-19 case/mortality rates with levels of anxiety among Canadians during the pandemic. METHODS: This study used linear regression models populated with three integrated sources of data: a repeated cross-sectional survey (n = 7008), Oxford COVID-19 Government Response Tracker data, and COVID-19 case/mortality rates. Sociodemographic factors included were age, gender, race, province, income, education, rurality, household composition, and factors related to employment. RESULTS: Local COVID-19 case and mortality rates and stay-at-home orders were positively associated with anxiety symptom severity. Anxiety was most severe among those who: were female, Indigenous, or Middle Eastern; had postsecondary education; lived with others; and became unemployed or had working hours altered during the pandemic. Anxiety was less severe among: older adults; male, Caucasians, and black individuals; those with high incomes, and; those for whom employment did not change during the pandemic. CONCLUSION: Anxiety was primarily driven by socioeconomic factors among Canadians during the COVID-19 pandemic. Policies that alleviate socioeconomic uncertainty for groups that are most vulnerable may reduce the long-term harm of the pandemic and associated lockdown policies.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".