Department of Preventive Medicine and Public Health, University of Zaragoza, Zaragoza, SpainCentro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Salud Mental (CIBERSAM), Madrid, Spain
Dr. Javier Santabarbara
Department of Preventive Medicine and Public Health, University of Zaragoza, Zaragoza, SpainCentro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Salud Mental (CIBERSAM), Madrid, Spain
Background: Since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, teachers have been accumulating adverse psychological symptoms due to the closure of educational centers and the need to adapt to different teaching modalities. Methods: Medline and PubMed were searched for studies on the prevalence of depression, anxiety, stress, and burn-out in teachers, published from 1 December 2019 to 15 June 2021. Results: In total, eight studies were included in this study. The results show that teachers report levels of anxiety (17%), depression (19%), and stress (30%). In Asia, there has been more anxiety compared to other continents. Overall, anxiety has been higher among teachers in schools compared to universities. However, stress levels have been higher among teachers in universities compared to schools. Statistically, there were no significant differences regarding gender and age in any of the symptoms. Conclusions: The results suggest that teachers at different educational levels are experiencing adverse psychological symptomatology during the COVID-19 pandemic, and that anxiety levels vary between different countries. However, more international studies are needed to fully understand the impact of the pandemic on teachers’ mental health.
The novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic has brought a great deal of pressure for medical students, who typically show elevated anxiety rates. Our aim is to investigate the prevalence of anxiety in medical students during this pandemic. This systematic review and mini meta-analysis has been conducted following the PRISMA guidelines. Two researchers independently searched PubMed on 26 August 2020 for cross-sectional studies on medical students during the COVID-19 outbreak, with no language restrictions applied. We then performed a manual search to detect other potentially eligible investigations. To the 1361 records retrieved in the initial search, 4 more were added by manual search on medRxiv. Finally, eight studies were finally included for qualitative and quantitative analysis, which yielded an estimated prevalence of anxiety of 28% (95% CI: 22–34%), with significant heterogeneity between studies. The prevalence of anxiety in medical students is similar to that prior to the pandemic but correlates with several specific COVID-related stressors. While some preventive and risk factors have been previously identified in a non-pandemic context, knowledge and cognitions on COVID-19 transmission, treatment, prognosis and prevention negatively correlate with anxiety, emerging as a key preventive factor that may provide a rationale for why the levels of anxiety have remained stable in medical students during the pandemic while increasing in their non-medical peers and the general population. Other reasons for the invariability of anxiety rates in this population are discussed. A major limitation of our review is that Chinese students comprised 89% the total sample, which could compromise the external validity of our work
Alzheimer’s disease (AD) is the most frequent cause of dementia, linked to morbidity and mortality among elderly patients. Recently, several clinical studies suggested that depression is a potential risk factor for cognitive decline and AD. A review of meta-analyses was performed, calculating pooled odds ratios to estimate the risk of AD in people with a prior diagnosis (or clinically significant symptoms) of depression. A total of six meta-analyses which represented 28 individual studies were analyzed. A significant association between depression and AD was found (OR = 1.54, 95% CI [1.02–2.31]; p = 0.038). The results showed that heterogeneity across studies was substantial. We found a significant positive effect size for clinical measures of depression, but not for symptomatic rating scales, in the association of depression with risk of AD. The type of rating scale used to assess depression and the cut-off criteria selected also moderated the relationship between depression and AD risk. We found that studies that used clinically significant criteria for diagnosis of depression had more consistent and significant results than studies that used symptomatic scales.
Background: Alzheimer’s disease (AD) is the most common subtype of dementia. In the last ten years, the relationship between cholesterol and AD has been investigated. Evidence suggests that cholesterol is associated with AD and represents promising targets for intervention. However, the causality of these associations is unclear. Therefore, we sought to conduct a meta-meta-analysis to determine the effect of cholesterol on the development AD. Then, we assessed the effect of serum levels of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), total cholesterol (TC) and triglycerides (TG), on AD risk. Methods: A systematic search of meta-analyses was conducted. Scopus, Web of Science, Science direct, PubMed and Google academic system databases were reviewed. Results: We found 100 primary studies and five meta-analyses to analyze the relationships between cholesterol and AD. The total effect of cholesterol on risk of AD was significant and heterogeneous. Subgroup analysis shows that LDL-C levels influence the development of AD. However, non-significant effects of HDL-C, TC and TG levels on AD were found. Conclusions: These results strengthen the evidence that LDL-C cholesterol levels increase risk for AD. More initiatives to investigate the relationship between cholesterol and AD are needed.
Background: There is evidence of a high psychological toll from the COVID-19 pandemic in healthcare workers. This paper was aimed at conducting a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies reporting levels of depression among healthcare workers during the COVID-19 and estimating the pooled prevalence of depression. Methods: We searched for cross-sectional studies listed on PubMed from 1 December 2019 to 15 September 2020 that reported prevalence of depression in healthcare workers, nurses, medical doctors, and COVID-19 frontline professionals. The pooled proportions of depression were calculated with random effects models. Results: We identified 57 studies from seventeen countries. The pooled prevalence of depression in healthcare workers was 24% (95% CI: 20–28%), 25% for nurses (95% CI: 18–33%), 24% for medical doctors (95% CI: 16–31%), and 43% for frontline professionals (95% CI: 28–59%). Conclusions: The proportion of depression in nurses and medical doctors during the COVID-19 pandemic was similar to that found in the general population as previously reported in other meta-analyses conducted with smaller numbers of studies. Importantly, almost half of the frontline healthcare workers showed increased levels of depression. There is need for a comprehensive, international response to prevent and treat common mental health problems in healthcare workers.