4.3 Article

Predictors of Depression and Anxiety Symptoms in Brazil during COVID-19

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/ijerph18137026

关键词

COVID-19; Brazil; anxiety; depression; predictors; risk factors

资金

  1. Institute for State-Owned Enterprises of Tsinghua University
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China [71772103]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study found that during the initial outbreak of COVID-19 in Brazil, over 70% of adults experienced depressive symptoms and over 60% experienced anxiety symptoms. Factors such as being female, younger, having fewer children, working as an employee, and spending more time browsing COVID-19 information online were associated with higher likelihood of depression and anxiety symptoms. These results provide early warning for psychiatrists and healthcare organizations to focus on vulnerable sub-populations in Brazil during the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic.
The COVID-19 pandemic in Brazil is extremely severe, and Brazil has the third-highest number of cases in the world. The goal of the study is to identify the prevalence rates and several predictors of depression and anxiety in Brazil during the initial outbreak of COVID-19. We surveyed 482 adults in 23 Brazilian states online on 9-22 May 2020, and found that 70.3% of the adults (n = 339) had depressive symptoms and 67.2% (n = 320) had anxiety symptoms. The results of multi-class logistic regression models revealed that females, younger adults, and those with fewer children had a higher likelihood of depression and anxiety symptoms; adults who worked as employees were more likely to have anxiety symptoms than those who were self-employed or unemployed; adults who spent more time browsing COVID-19 information online were more likely to have depression and anxiety symptoms. Our results provide preliminary evidence and early warning for psychiatrists and healthcare organizations to better identify and focus on the more vulnerable sub-populations in Brazil during the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据