Dataset Information

Personal Economic Worries in Response to COVID-19 Pandemic: A Cross Sectional Study

ABSTRACT:

Objectives

The emergence of the COVID-19 pandemic worsened Lebanon’s economic situation and generated worries about living conditions. This study aimed to explain personal economic worries patterns among Lebanese young adults while accounting for demographics and mental health characteristics.

Methods

A total sample of 988 Lebanese responses were collected, using an online survey. The analysis was conducted using regression-based methods.

Results

Men exhibited higher economic worries than women. Lower levels of economic worries among people with higher wages were more pronounced. Lebanese retirees experience the highest economic worries compared to other employment status groups. Individuals with higher life satisfaction are less concerned about the economy. Mental wellbeing factors were positively associated with personal economic worries.

Conclusion

The current study presents a seminal insight into the differences in economic worries caused by COVID-19 pandemic among individuals in a developing country context.

SUBMITTER: Bou-Hamad I

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9280425 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundAs the number of COVID-19 cases increased precipitously in the United States, policy makers and health officials marshalled their pandemic responses. As the economic impacts multiplied, anecdotal reports noted the increased use of web-based crowdfunding to defray these costs.ObjectiveWe examined the web-based crowdfunding response in the early stage of the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States to understand the incidence of initiation of COVID-19-related campaigns and compare them to non-COVID-19-related campaigns.MethodsOn May 16, 2020, we extracted all available data available on US campaigns that contained narratives and were created between January 1 and May 10, 2020, on GoFundMe. We identified the subset of COVID-19-related campaigns using keywords relevant to the COVID-19 pandemic. We explored the incidence of COVID-19-related campaigns by geography, by category, and over time, and we compared the characteristics of the campaigns to those of non-COVID-19-related campaigns after March 11, when the pandemic was declared. We then used a natural language processing algorithm to cluster campaigns by narrative content using overlapping keywords.ResultsWe found that there was a substantial increase in overall GoFundMe web-based crowdfunding campaigns in March, largely attributable to COVID-19-related campaigns. However, as the COVID-19 pandemic persisted and progressed, the number of campaigns per COVID-19 case declined more than tenfold across all states. The states with the earliest disease burden had the fewest campaigns per case, indicating a lack of a case-dependent response. COVID-19-related campaigns raised more money, had a longer narrative description, and were more likely to be shared on Facebook than other campaigns in the study period.ConclusionsWeb-based crowdfunding appears to be a stopgap for only a minority of campaigners. The novelty of an emergency likely impacts both campaign initiation and crowdfunding success, as it reflects the affective response of a community. Crowdfunding activity likely serves as an early signal for emerging needs and societal sentiment for communities in acute distress that could be used by governments and aid organizations to guide disaster relief and policy.

Project description:The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) is an emergent infectious pathogen causing an acute respiratory disease called corona virus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Virus transmission may occur by contact, droplet, airborne or via contaminated surfaces. In efforts to effectively control the COVID-19 outbreak, the world health organization (WHO) and the Saudi Ministry of Health (MOH) have advised the public to practice protective measures to reduce transmission of the virus and reduce incidence of infection. These measures include hand washing, wearing masks and gloves and avoidance of touching the face with unwashed hands. The current study aimed to investigate knowledge and adherence of the Saudi population to these protective actions during the pandemic. After determining the required sample size using power analysis, a cross-sectional online self-reported survey of 5105 Saudi residents was conducted between 25th March to 17th April 2020 to evaluate public knowledge of COVID-19. Participants were all aged 18 years or above, Arabic speakers and residents of Saudi Arabia. Scores were calculated based on knowledge and adherence of the individuals to protective measures. About 90% of participants exhibited a high level of knowledge (scored 2/2) and practice (scored > 3/6) in relation to hand hygiene and wearing gloves and masks. Practice scores were positively associated with females and individuals with high income. Lower practice scores were linked to youth and residents of the northern and western regions of the Kingdom. Over two thirds of participants preferred hand washing to alcohol disinfection, and the frequency and performance of hand washing improved during the pandemic for more than half of respondents. Overall, the findings reflected high public knowledge of SARS-CoV2 transmission routes and adherence to personal protective measures. However, public awareness campaigns with an emphasis on the youth and individuals with low education and income are required to improve overall practice.

Project description:This study explores the response to COVID-19 from investigators, editors, and publishers and seeks to define challenges during the early stages of the pandemic. A cross-sectional bibliometric review of COVID-19 literature was undertaken between 1 November 2019 and 24 March 2020, along with a comparative review of Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS) literature. Investigator responsiveness was assessed by measuring the volume and type of research published. Editorial responsiveness was assessed by measuring the submission-to-acceptance time and availability of original data. Publisher-responsiveness was assessed by measuring the acceptance-to-publication time and the provision of open access. Three hundred and ninety-eight of 2,835 COVID-19 and 55 of 1,513 MERS search results were eligible. Most COVID-19 studies were clinical reports (n = 242; 60.8%). The submission-to-acceptance [median: 5 days (IQR: 3-11) versus 71.5 days (38-106); P < .001] and acceptance-to-publication [median: 5 days (IQR: 2-8) versus 22.5 days (4-48·5-; P < .001] times were strikingly shorter for COVID-19. Almost all COVID-19 (n = 396; 99.5%) and MERS (n = 55; 100%) studies were open-access. Data sharing was infrequent, with original data available for 104 (26.1%) COVID-19 and 10 (18.2%) MERS studies (P = .203). The early academic response was characterized by investigators aiming to define the disease. Studies were made rapidly and openly available. Only one-in-four were published alongside original data, which is a key target for improvement.Key pointsCOVID-19 publications show rapid response from investigators, specifically aiming to define the disease.Median time between submission and acceptance of COVID-19 articles is 5 days demonstrating rapid decision-making compared with the median of 71.5 days for MERS articles.Median time from acceptance to publication of COVID-19 articles is 5 days, confirming the ability to introduce rapid increases at times of crisis, such as during the SARS outbreak.The majority of both COVID-19 and MERS articles are available open-access.

Project description:BackgroundThe use of personal protective equipment (PPE) decreased the probability of viral transmission during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, some drawbacks have been observed with its extensive use, such as headaches, anxiety, and stress among physicians, which could affect decision-making processes, the performance of physicians, and consequently patients' safety. Few articles have studied the impact of PPE on physicians from different specialties. This study assessed the effect of wearing PPE on the performance and decision-making of physicians during the COVID-19 pandemic and compared the effects of wearing PPE on physicians from different specialties.MethodsA descriptive cross-sectional study was carried out through an anonymous 39-item online questionnaire. The physicians were divided according to the probability and frequency of performing invasive procedures. Group 1 included emergency medicine and critical care physicians, intensivists, and anesthetists, group 2 included physicians from different surgical subspecialties, and group 3 included physicians from different medical fields.ResultsThis study included 272 physicians; group 1 included 54, group 2 included 120, and group 3 included 98 physicians. Approximately, 90.4% of the participants aged between 30 and -40 years, and 72.8% of the participants were specialists. Results indicated that the comfort, vision, and communication were significantly reduced in all groups (81.1%, 88.7%, and 75.5%, respectively). In contrast, the handling of instruments was not significantly affected in the second group only. In addition, the decision-making and the rate of complications were not significantly affected.ConclusionThere was a negative impact of wearing PPE on the non-technical skills (vision, communication and overall comfort), and the technical skills of the physicians. The decision-making and patients' safety were not significantly affected. Recommendations include additional improvement of the PPE design due to its crucial effect on both non-technical and technical skills of physicians.

Project description:BackgroundHealthcare workers (HCWs) caring for COVID-19 infected patients are exposed to stressful and traumatic events with potential for severe and sustained adverse mental and physical health consequences. Our aim was to assess the magnitude of physical and mental health outcomes of HCWs due to the prolonged use of personal protective equipment (PPE) treating COVID-19 patients.MethodsThis cross-sectional study assessed the symptoms of stress, anxiety, insomnia, and psychological resilience using the Stress and Anxiety to Viral Epidemics (SAVE) scale, Insomnia Severity Index (ISI), and Resilience Scale (RS), respectively, in Italy between 1st February and 31st March 2022. The physical outcomes reported included vertigo, dyspnea, nausea, micturition desire, retroauricular pain, thirst, discomfort at work, physical fatigue, and thermal stress. The relationships between prolonged PPE use and psychological outcomes and physical discomforts were analyzed using Generalized Linear Models (GLMs). We calculated the factor mean scores and a binary outcome to measure study outcomes.FindingsWe found that 23% of the respondents reported stress related symptoms, 33% anxiety, 43% moderate to severe insomnia, and 67% reported moderate to very low resilience. The GLMs suggested that older people (>55 years old) are less likely to suffer from stress compared to younger people (<35 y.o); conversely, HCW aged more than 35 years are more inclined to suffer from insomnia than younger people (<35 y.o). Female HCW reported a lower probability of resilience than males. University employed HCWs were less likely to report anxiety than those who worked in a community hospital. The odds of suffering from insomnia for social workers was significantly higher than for other HCWs. Female HCW>3 years old, enrolled in training programs for nursing, social work, technical training and other healthcare professionals increased the probability of reported physical discomforts. HCW that worked on non COVID-19 wards and used PPE for low-medium exposure level, were at lower risks for lasting physical side effects as compared to the HCW who worked in high-risk PPE intense, COVID-19 environments.InterpretationThe study suggests that frontline HCWs who had extensive PPE exposure while directly engaged in the diagnosis, treatment, and care for patients with COVID-19 are at significant risks for lasting physical and psychological harm and distress.

Project description:Background: Since the outbreak of COVID-19 were announced in Wuhan, China, the virus has spread in most countries. After one year of restrictive measures applied by governments, it is unclear how this prolonged social distancing has affected the mental health of individuals in Libya. Therefore, the present study aims to assess the levels of perceived stress, depression, sleep disturbance, and self-efficacy associated with the pandemic in Libya and their association with the demographic factors. Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted between October 10 and November 10, 2020 in 21 cities in Libya using an online survey. The survey collected socio-demographic variables and other important psychological variables using valid scales: namely, the Perceived Stress scale, the PROMIS Depression scale, the PROMIS Sleep Disturbance scale, and self-efficacy 6-item scale. Additionally, data were collected regarding eating and smoking habits, housing and living situations, and the preparedness of the public to manage the upcoming waves of the pandemic. Results: The questionnaire was accessed 746 times, and a total of 683 completed questionnaires were analyzed (response rate of 91.6%), with ages ranging from 18 to 94 years (Mean ± SD = 27.09 ± 10.57). Among the respondents, 58.4% were females and 77% were from the age group 18-29 years. The perceived stress, depression, and sleep disturbance symptoms were high in overall population. For stress, 52.7 and 17.1% of respondents reported moderate and high stress, and for sleep quality 28.8 and 8.1% reported moderate and high sleep disturbance, respectively. For depression, the overall median score was 20 (out of 40). The perceived stress, depression, and sleep disturbance were more prevalent among females and the younger age groups (18-29 years old). The overall self-efficacy median total score was 6.67 (out of 10), with a significantly higher median total score for males than females (7 vs. 6.33, p = 0.001). About 14.5% of the respondents were regular cigarette smokers, and most of them (79.8%) described their smoking habits during the previous month as more than typical. In addition, the reported eating habits of almost half of the respondents (43%) had changed, with about one-third (29.6%) reporting that their eating habits had become less healthy during the pandemic. Conclusion: The findings of this research suggest increased levels of stress, depression, and sleep disturbances as well as COVID-19-related fear during the pandemic, especially among young females. This alarming finding urgently calls for safe and low-barrier interventions to help mentally burdened individuals. This study makes a significant contribution in providing essential data on the psychological and social impacts on the Libyan population due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Project description:BackgroundAlthough remote communication technologies have been widely used to maintain connections with others against interpersonal contact restrictions and exacerbated loneliness during the COVID-19 pandemic, it is unclear whether and what types of remote communication technologies are effective in mitigating loneliness.ObjectiveThis study aimed to investigate the association between remote communication and loneliness when face-to-face meetings with others were strongly prohibited and whether this association varied across types of communication tools, age, and gender.MethodsWe used cross-sectional data from the Japan COVID-19 and Society Internet Survey conducted from August to September 2020. From registered panelists of the research agency, 28,000 randomly sampled participants completed the survey on the website. We created 2 study cohorts who stopped meeting with family members living apart and friends during the pandemic. We categorized whether participants had technology-based remote communication (voice calling, text messaging, and video calling) with family and friends. Loneliness was assessed using the 3-item University of California, Los Angeles Loneliness Scale. We used a modified Poisson regression model to investigate the association between loneliness and remote communication with family members living apart or friends. We also conducted subgroup analyses based on age and gender.ResultsA total of 4483 participants stopped meeting with family members living apart, and 6783 participants stopped meeting with friends during the COVID-19 pandemic. Remote communication with family members living apart did not show an association with loneliness, whereas remote communication with friends was associated with a low prevalence of loneliness (family: adjusted prevalence ratio [aPR]=0.89, 95% CI 0.74-1.08; P=.24 and friends: aPR=0.82, 95% CI 0.73-0.91; P<.001). From analyses by tools, voice calling was associated with low loneliness (family: aPR=0.88, 95% CI 0.78-0.98; P=.03 and friends: aPR=0.87, 95% CI 0.80-0.95; P=.003). Similarly, text messaging was associated with low loneliness (family: aPR=0.82, 95% CI 0.69-0.97; P=.02 and friends: aPR=0.81, 95% CI 0.73-0.89; P<.001). However, we did not find an association between video calling and loneliness (family: aPR=0.88, 95% CI 0.75-1.02; P=.09 and friends: aPR=0.94, 95% CI 0.85-1.04; P=.25). Text messaging with friends was associated with low loneliness regardless of age, whereas voice calling with family or friends was associated with low loneliness only among participants aged ≥65 years. An association between remote communication with friends and low loneliness was found regardless of the type of remote communication tool among men, whereas it was found only for text messaging with friends among women.ConclusionsIn this cross-sectional study of adults in Japan, remote communication, especially via voice calling and text messaging, was associated with low loneliness. Promoting remote communication may reduce loneliness when face-to-face contact is restricted, which should be the subject of future research.