MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386802484 · doi:10.1093/milmed/usad350

COVID-19 Concerns, Information Needs, and Adverse Mental Health Outcomes among U.S. Soldiers

2023· article· en· W4386802484 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Phillip J. Quartana, Matthew R. Beymer, Stephanie A. Q. Gomez, Amy B. Adler, Theresa Jackson Santo, Jeffrey L. Thomas, Amy Millikan Bell

Bibliographic record

VenueMilitary Medicine · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicCOVID-19 and Mental Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersU.S. Army Medical Research and Development CommandArmy Public Health CenterU.S. Army Medical Department
KeywordsMental healthMedicinePandemicCoping (psychology)Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Environmental healthPublic healthQuarter (Canadian coin)GerontologyPsychiatryDiseaseNursingGeographyInfectious disease (medical specialty)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic disrupted U.S. Military operations and potentially compounded the risk for adverse mental health outcomes by layering unique occupational stress on top of general restrictions, fears, and concerns. The objective of the current study was to characterize the prevalence of COVID-19 concerns and information needs, demographic disparities in these outcomes, and the degree to which COVID-19 concerns and information needs were associated with heightened risk for adverse mental health outcomes among U.S. Army soldiers. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Command-directed anonymous surveys were administered electronically to U.S. soldiers assigned to one of three regional commands in the Northwest United States, Europe, and Asia-Pacific Region. Surveys were administered in May to June 2020 to complete (time 1: n = 21,294) and again in December 2020 to January 2021 (time 2: n = 10,861). Only active duty or active reservists/national guard were eligible to participate. Members from other branches of service were also not eligible. RESULTS: Highly prevalent COVID-19 concerns included the inability to spend time with friends/family, social activities, and changing rules, regulations, and guidance related to COVID-19. Some information needs were endorsed by one quarter or more soldiers at both time points, including stress management/coping, travel, how to protect oneself, and maintaining mission readiness. COVID-19 concerns and information needs were most prevalent among non-White soldiers. Concerns and information needs did not decline overall between the assessments. Finally, COVID-19 concerns were associated with greater risk of multiple adverse mental health outcomes at both time points. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 concerns and information needs were prevalent and showed little evidence of decrement over the course of the first 6 months of the pandemic. COVID-19 concerns were consistently associated with adverse mental health outcomes. These data highlight two targets and potential demographic subgroups such that local leadership and Army medicine and public health enterprises can be better prepared to monitor and address to maintain force health and readiness in the face of possible future biomedical threats.

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)0.004
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 score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.064

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.065
GPT teacher head0.422
Teacher spread0.357 · 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

Citations6
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMilitary MedicineSame topicCOVID-19 and Mental HealthFrench-language works237,207