The COVID-19 pandemic has impacted the lives of the worldwide population. Citizens suffer the social, economic, physiological, and psychological effects of this pandemic. Primary sources, scientific articles, and secondary bibliographic indexes, databases, and web pages were used for a consensus critical review. The method was a narrative review of the available literature to summarize the existing literature addressing mental health concerns and stressors related to the COVID-19 pandemic. The main search engines used in the present research were PubMed, SciELO, and Google Scholar. We found the pandemic has had a direct impact on psychopathologies such as anxiety, increasing its ratios, and depression. Other syndromes such as burnout and post-traumatic stress disorder have increased with the pandemic, showing a larger incidence among medical personnel. Moreover, eating disorders and violence have also increased. Public authorities must prepare healthcare systems for increasing incidences of mental pathologies. Mental health apps are one of the tools that can be used to reach the general population.

The novel Coronavirus 2 Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS-Cov-2) has led to the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, which has surprised health authorities around the world, quickly producing a global health crisis. Different actions to cope with this situation are being developed, including confinement, different treatments to improve symptoms, and the creation of the first vaccines. In epidemiology, herd immunity is presented as an area that could also solve this new global threat. In this review, we present the basis of herd immunology, the dynamics of infection transmission that induces specific immunity, and how the application of immunoepidemiology and herd immunology could be used to control the actual COVID-19 pandemic, along with a discussion of its effectiveness, limitations, and applications.

The Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has surprised health authorities around the world producing a global health crisis. This research discusses the main psychosocial stressors associated with COVID-19 in the literature, and the responses of global public mental health services to these events. Thus, a consensus and critical review were performed using both primary sources, such as scientific articles and secondary ones, such as bibliographic indexes, web pages, and databases. The main search engines were PubMed, SciELO, and Google Scholar. The method was a systematic literature review (SLR) of the available literature regarding mental health services during the COVID-19 pandemic to conduct the present narrative review. Different stressors are identified in this pandemic, from psychophysiological, confinement, to social and work. Depending on the level of severity and the country of origin, various interventions have been applied that mark different ways of returning to normality and preparing new interventions. This new stressor has a direct impact on the mental health of the population, provoking governments, and health services to become more flexible, innovate and adapt to the changing situation. The use of technology and mass media could be an important tool in this aim. Independent of this, preparing the general population for possible future waves of the pandemic is currently the best measure to mitigate more serious effects on the mental health of the population.

Background: In this narrative review, we address the COVID-19 pandemic mis–dis information crisis in which healthcare systems have been pushed to their limits, with collapses occurring worldwide. The context of uncertainty has resulted in skepticism, confusion, and general malaise among the population. Informing the public has been one of the major challenges during this pandemic. Misinformation is defined as false information shared by people who have no intention of misleading others. Disinformation is defined as false information deliberately created and disseminated with malicious intentions. Objective: To reach a consensus and critical review about mis–dis information in COVID-19 crisis. Methods: A database search was conducted in PsychINFO, MedLine (Pubmed), Cochrane (Wiley), Embase and CinAhl. Databases used the MeSH-compliant keywords of COVID-19, 2019-nCoV, Coronavirus 2019, SARS-CoV-2, misinformation, disinformation, information, vaccines, vaccination, origin, target, spread, communication. Results: Both misinformation and disinformation can affect the population’s confidence in vaccines (development, safety, and efficacy of vaccines, as well as denial of the severity of SARS-CoV infection). Institutions should take into account that a great part of the success of the intervention to combat a pandemic has a relationship with the power to stop the misinformation and disinformation processes. The response should be well-structured and addressed from different key points: central level and community level, with official and centralized communication channels. The approach should be multifactorial and enhanced by the collaboration of social media companies to stop misleading information, and trustworthy people both working or not working in the health care systems to boost the power of the message. Conclusions: The response should be well-structured and addressed from different key points: central level and community level, with official and clearly centralized communication channels. The approach should be multifactorial and enhanced from the collaboration of social media companies to stop misleading information, and trustworthy people both working and not working in the health care systems to boost the power of a message based on scientific evidence.

Stress in academic settings arises from the interplay between perceived demands such as exams, deadlines, and academic workload and an individual’s coping resources. While academic stress (AS) is frequently examined as a separate construct, the stress encountered in an academic environment encompasses both academic and non-academic stressors that students face throughout their university experience. This study examined the longitudinal associations between stress in an academic context on key psychological, physiological, and behavioral variables in university students. A longitudinal study was conducted with 115 Colombian psychology students aged 16 to 35 years, evaluated at the beginning and end of an academic semester. Variables were measured using validated psychometric questionnaires, including the Big Five inventory, the Zung Depression Scale, the UCLA Loneliness Scale, the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI), the Acceptance and Action Questionnaire (AAQ-II), the Perceived Stress Scale-4 (PSS-4). Behavioral data, such as physical activity, sleep patterns, and academic performance, were also recorded. Heart rate variability (HRV), a widely used physiological marker of autonomic nervous system function and stress regulation, was assessed. Paired t-tests were used to compare baseline and final measurements, and multiple linear regression determined predictors of academic performance. Longitudinal analysis revealed significant declines in sleep duration, quality, and heart rate variability (HRV), alongside increased anxiety and depressive symptoms, indicating heightened stress and autonomic dysregulation. Despite these adverse effects, academic performance improved. This pattern suggests a complex association where higher achievement coincided with declining well-being markers. Regression models identified depressive symptoms as negative predictors of performance, while greater HRV (SD1, PNN50) and balanced autonomic activity were positively associated with academic performance. This study examines the longitudinal effects of stress within an academic environment on the psychological, physiological, and behavioral outcomes of university students. The findings showed compromised sleep patterns, changes in autonomic regulation, and mental health indicators; nevertheless, an increase in academic performance is also noted. However, this enhancement coincides with heightened levels of anxiety, depressive symptoms, and physiological dysregulation. These results highlight the necessity for targeted interventions aimed at fostering resilience and promoting a holistic sense of well-being.

The prevalence of stress among university students has become a significant public health concern, with gender differences in psychophysiological responses remaining understudied. This study examined how gender influences stress-related factors and their association with academic performance. A cross-sectional study was conducted with 601 Colombian university students (74.7 % women, aged 15-47). Participants completed online questionnaires assessing sleep habits, personality traits (Big Five Inventory), anxiety (STAI), psychological inflexibility (AAQ-II), solitude (UCLA), perceived stress (PSS-4), and depression (Zung Scale). Heart rate variability (HRV) was measured via ECG to evaluate autonomic function. Academic performance was quantified using GPAs (1-5 scale). Independent t-tests and multiple linear regression analyses were performed. Women exhibited significantly higher levels of neuroticism (p = 0.01), anxiety (p = 0.01), psychological inflexibility (p = 0.01), and perceived stress (p = 0.01) compared to their male counterparts. Regression analyses revealed gender-specific patterns: in women, academic success was predicted by longer sleep duration (B = 0.08, p = 0.01), moderate anxiety levels (B = 0.03, p = 0.01), and sympathetic activation (LFnu: B = 0.01, p = 0.01; R²=26 %). In men, poorer performance correlated with autonomic dysregulation (higher HR: B=-0.01, p = 0.04; lower PNN50: B=-0.01, p = 0.01; R²=30 %). Notably, no significant gender differences emerged in HRV parameters or sleep measures. This study reveals a paradox: women maintained strong academic performance despite higher stress levels, potentially due to adaptive stress responses (moderate sympathetic activation). In contrast, men's performance was more affected by physiological dysregulation. While these findings suggest gender-divergent stress pathways, longitudinal research with direct emotion regulation measures is needed. The results underscore the value of gender-tailored interventions in academia.