Depression and assets during the COVID-19 pandemic: A longitudinal study of mental health across income and savings groups.

The prevalence of depression in U.S. adults during the COVID-19 pandemic has been high overall and particularly high among persons with fewer assets. Building on previous work on assets and mental health, we document the burden of depression in groups based on income and savings during the first two years of the COVID-19 pandemic. Using a nationally representative, longitudinal panel study of U.S. adults (N = 1,271) collected in April-May 2020 (T1), April-May 2021 (T2), and April-May 2022 (T3), we estimated the adjusted odds of reporting probable depression at any time during the COVID-19 pandemic with generalized estimating equations (GEE). We explored probable depression-defined as a score of ≥10 on the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9)-by four asset groups, defined by median income (≥$65,000) and savings (≥$20,000) categories. The prevalence of probable depression was consistently high in Spring 2020, Spring 2021, and Spring 2022 with 27.9% of U.S. adults reporting probable depression in Spring 2022. We found that there were four distinct asset groups that experienced different depression trajectories over the COVID-19 pandemic. Low income-low savings asset groups had the highest level of probable depression across time, reporting 3.7 times the odds (95% CI: 2.6, 5.3) of probable depression at any time relative to high income-high savings asset groups. While probable depression stayed relatively stable across time for most groups, the low income-low savings group reported significantly higher levels of probable depression at T2, compared to T1, and the high income-low savings group reported significantly higher levels of probable depression at T3 than T1. The weighted average of probable depression across time was 42.9% for low income-low savings groups, 24.3% for high income-low savings groups, 19.4% for low income-high savings groups, and 14.0% for high income-high savings groups. Efforts to ameliorate both savings and income may be necessary to mitigate the mental health consequences of pandemics.

An Asset Framework to Guide Nonhealth Policy for Population Health.

This JAMA Forum discusses 3 types of assets (financial, physical, and social) that unlock access to resources and shape population health.

Pandemic stressors and mental health indicators in eight countries.

PURPOSE: The Covid-19 pandemic has exacted a significant physical, financial, social, and emotional toll on populations throughout the world. This study aimed to document the association between pandemic stressors and mental health during the pandemic across countries that differ in cultural, geographic, economic, and demographic factors. METHODS: We administered an online survey randomly in Brazil, China, Germany, Egypt, India, Indonesia, Nigeria, and the United States from September 2020 to November 2020. This survey included questions on Covid-19-related stressors as well as the Patient Health Questionnaire-2 and the Primary Care PTSD Checklist to screen for depression and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) symptoms, respectively. We performed bivariable and multivariable regression analyses to assess the prevalence and odds ratios of overall depression symptoms and probable PTSD and in relation to stressors across countries. RESULTS: Among 8754 respondents, 28.9% (95% CI 27.5-30.0%) experienced depression symptoms, and 5.1% (95% CI 4.5-6.0%) experienced probable PTSD. The highest prevalence of depression symptoms was in Egypt (41.3%, 95% CI 37.6-45.0%) and lowest in the United States (24.9%, 95% CI 22.3-27.7%). The highest prevalence of probable PTSD was in Brazil (7.3%, 95% CI 5.6-9.4%) and the lowest in China (1.2%, 95% CI 0.7-2.0%). Overall, experiencing six or more Covid-19-related stressors was associated with both depression symptoms (OR 1.90, 95% CI 1.46-2.48) and probable PTSD (OR 13.8, 95% CI 9.66-19.6). CONCLUSION: The association between pandemic related stressors and the burden of adverse mental health indicators early in the Covid-19 pandemic transcended geographic, economic, cultural, and demographic differences between countries. The short-term and long-term impacts of the pandemic on mental health should be incorporated in efforts to tackle the consequences of Covid-19.

Symptoms of Posttraumatic Stress During the COVID-19 Pandemic in the Governmental Public Health Workforce and General Population.

We aimed to estimate the prevalence of COVID-19-related posttraumatic stress symptoms (PTSS) in the governmental public health workforce and in US adults, assess differences in reporting PTSS within subgroups, and evaluate whether frontline workers reported higher levels of PTSS than persons in other jobs. We used data from 2 nationally representative studies: the 2021 Public Health Workforce Interests and Needs Survey (PH WINS) and the COVID-19 and Life Stressors Impact on Mental Health and Well-being (CLIMB) study. Our study found that the state and local governmental public health workforce was more likely to report PTSS than the general adult population. Almost a quarter of public health agency employees (24.7%) and 21.1% of adults reported at least 3 symptoms of posttraumatic stress. Differences in levels of PTSS appeared within demographic groups for both samples. Personal care and service frontline workers had 4.3 times the odds of reporting symptoms of posttraumatic stress than non-frontline workers.

Financial strain and depression in the U.S.: a scoping review.

While the association between assets and depression has been established, less is known about the link between financial strain and depression. Given rising financial strain and economic inequity due to the COVID-19 pandemic, understanding the role that financial strain plays in shaping population depression in the United States is particularly salient. We conducted a scoping review of the peer-reviewed literature on financial strain and depression published from inception through January 19, 2023, in Embase, Medline via PubMed, and PsycINFO, PsycArticles, SocINDEX, and EconLit via Ebsco. We searched, reviewed, and synthesized the literature on longitudinal studies on financial strain and depression conducted in the United States. Four thousand and four unique citations were screened for eligibility. Fifty-eight longitudinal, quantitative articles on adults in the United States were included in the review. Eighty-three percent of articles (n = 48) reported a significant, positive association between financial strain and depression. Eight articles reported mixed results, featuring non-significant associations for some sub-groups and significant associations for others, one article was unclear, and one article reported no significant association between financial strain and depression. Five articles featured interventions to reduce depressive symptoms. Effective interventions included coping mechanisms to improve one's financial situation (e.g., mechanisms to assist in finding employment), to modify cognitive behavior (e.g., reframing mindset), and to engage support (e.g., engaging social and community support). Successful interventions were tailored to participants, were group-based (e.g., they included family members or other job seekers), and occurred over multiple sessions. While depression was defined consistently, financial strain was defined variably. Gaps in the literature included studies featuring Asian populations in the United States and interventions to reduce financial strain. There is a consistent, positive association between financial strain and depression in the United States. More research is needed to identify and test interventions that mitigate the ill effects of financial strain on population's mental health.

Global Health Equity Requires Global Equity.

Many global health challenges are characterized by the inequitable patterning of their health and economic consequences, which are etched along the lines of pre-existing inequalities in resources, power, and opportunity. These links require us to reconsider how we define global health equity, and what we consider as most consequential in its pursuit. In this article, we discuss the extent to which improving underlying global equity is an essential prerequisite to global health equity. We conclude that if we are to improve global health equity, there is a need to focus more on foundational-rather than proximal-causes of ill health and propose ways in which this can be achieved.

Economic precarity, loneliness, and suicidal ideation during the COVID-19 pandemic.

The US population faced stressors associated with suicide brought on by the COVID-19 pandemic. Understanding the relationship between stressors and suicidal ideation in the context of the pandemic may inform policies and programs to prevent suicidality and suicide. We compared suicidal ideation between two cross-sectional, nationally representative surveys of adults in the United States: the 2017-2018 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) and the 2020 COVID-19 and Life Stressors Impact on Mental Health and Well-being (CLIMB) study (conducted March 31 to April 13). We estimated the association between stressors and suicidal ideation in bivariable and multivariable Poisson regression models with robust variance to generate unadjusted and adjusted prevalence ratios (PR and aPR). Suicidal ideation increased from 3.4% in the 2017-2018 NHANES to 16.3% in the 2020 CLIMB survey, and from 5.8% to 26.4% among participants in low-income households. In the multivariable model, difficulty paying rent (aPR: 1.5, 95% CI: 1.2-2.1) and feeling alone (aPR: 1.9, 95% CI: 1.5-2.4) were associated with suicidal ideation but job loss was not (aPR: 0.9, 95% CI: 0.6 to 1.2). Suicidal ideation increased by 12.9 percentage points and was almost 4.8 times higher during the COVID-19 pandemic. Suicidal ideation was more prevalent among people facing difficulty paying rent (31.5%), job loss (24.1%), and loneliness (25.1%), with each stressor associated with suicidal ideation in bivariable models. Difficulty paying rent and loneliness were most associated with suicidal ideation. Policies and programs to support people experiencing economic precarity and loneliness may contribute to suicide prevention.

Housing as a Social Determinant of Health: Evidence from Singapore, the UK, and Kenya: the 3-D Commission.

Housing is a paradigmatic example of a social determinant of health, as it influences and is influenced by structural determinants, such as social, macroeconomic, and public policies, politics, education, income, and ethnicity/race, all intersecting to shaping the health and well-being of populations. It can therefore be argued that housing policy is critically linked to health policy. However, the extent to which this linkage is understood and addressed in public policies is limited and highly diverse across and within countries. This analysis seeks to describe the linkages between housing policies and health and well-being using examples from three countries at different levels of the wealth spectrum: Singapore, the UK, and Kenya.We conducted a comparative policy analysis across three country contexts (Singapore, the UK, and Kenya) to document the extent to which housing policies address health and well-being, highlighting commonalities and differences among them. To guide our analysis, we used the United Nations (UN) definition of adequate housing as it offers a broad framework to analyze the impact of housing on health and well-being.The anatomy of housing policies has a strong correlation to the provision of adequate housing across Singapore, the UK, and Kenya, especially for vulnerable groups. The paper demonstrates that contextual factors including population composition (i.e., aging versus youthful), political ideologies, legal frameworks (i.e., welfare versus market-based provision of housing), and presence (or absence) of adequate, quality, timely, reliable, robust data systems for decision-making, which are taken up by stakeholders/state, have strong implications of the type of housing policies developed and implemented, in turn directly and indirectly impacting the overall health and well-being of populations.This analysis demonstrates the value of viewing housing policies as public health policies that could significantly impact the health and well-being of populations, especially vulnerable groups. Moreover, the findings highlight the importance of the Health in All Policies approach to facilitate integrated policy responses to address social determinants of health such as housing. This is more critical than ever, given the context of the global pandemic that has led to worsening overall health and well-being.

Data, Social Determinants, and Better Decision-making for Health: the 3-D Commission.

More than a decade after the World Health Organization Commission on the Social Determinants of Health (SDoH), it is becoming widely accepted that social and economic factors, including but not limited to education, energy, income, race, ethnicity, and housing, are important drivers of health in populations. Despite this understanding, in most contexts, social determinants are not central to local, national, or global decision-making. Greater clarity in conceptualizing social determinants, and more specificity in measuring them, can move us forward towards better incorporating social determinants in decision-making for health. In this paper, first, we summarize the evolution of the social framing of health. Second, we describe how the social determinants are conceptualized and contextualized differently at the global, national, and local levels. With this, we seek to demonstrate the importance of analyzing and understanding SDoH relative to the contexts in which they are experienced. Third, we problematize the gap in data across contexts on different dimensions of social determinants and describe data that could be curated to better understand the influence of social determinants at the local and national levels. Fourth, we describe the necessity of using data to understand social determinants and inform decision-making to improve health. Our overall goal is to provide a path for our collective understanding of the foundational causes of health, facilitated by advances in data access and quality, and realized through improved decision-making.

Financial hardship and health risk behavior during COVID-19 in a large US national sample of women.

COVID-19 has caused over 300,000 US deaths thus far, but its long-term health consequences are not clear. Policies to contain the pandemic have led to widespread economic problems, which likely increase stress and resulting health risk behaviors, particularly among women, who have been hardest hit both by job loss and caregiving responsibilities. Further, women with pre-existing disadvantage (e.g., those without health insurance) may be most at risk for stress and consequent health risk behavior. Our objective was to estimate the associations between financial stressors from COVID-19 and health risk behavior changes since COVID-19, with potential effect modification by insurance status. We used multilevel logistic regression to assess the relationships between COVID-19-related financial stressors (job loss, decreases in pay, trouble paying bills) and changes in health risk behavior (less exercise, sleep, and healthy eating; more smoking/vaping and drinking alcohol), controlling for both individual-level and zip code-level confounders, among 90,971 US women who completed an online survey in March-April 2020. Almost 40% of women reported one or more COVID-19-related financial stressors. Each financial stressor was significantly associated with higher odds of each type of health risk behavior change. Overall, reporting one or more financial stressors was associated with 56% higher odds (OR = 1.56; 95% CI: 1.51, 1.60) of reporting two or more health risk behavior changes. This association was even stronger among women with no health insurance (OR = 2.46; 95% CI: 1.97, 3.07). COVID-19-related economic stress is thus linked to shifts in health risk behaviors among women, which may have physical health consequences for years to come. Further, the relationship between financial hardship and health risk behavior among women may be modified by health insurance status, as a marker for broader socioeconomic context and resources. The most socioeconomically vulnerable women are likely at highest risk for long-term health effects of COVID-19 financial consequences.

Taking the Long View: COVID-19 Priorities for the Biden Administration.

The COVID-19 pandemic transformed the American political landscape, influencing the course of the 2020 election and creating an urgent policy priority for the new administration. The Biden-Harris plan for beating COVID-19 represents a practicable, technically competent plan to contain the pandemic, one that will serve the country well in the months ahead. The authors suggest that the United States would also benefit from an even bolder set of aspirations-reframing the national conversation on COVID-19, embedding equity in all health decision making, strengthening the social safety net, and changing how we talk about health-as part of the national response to COVID-19. This would represent a genuine step forward in the US approach to health, informed by the systemic flaws COVID-19 exposed, and would realize benefits from the pandemic moment that in turn would propel national health forward for the rest of the century.

Low assets and financial stressors associated with higher depression during COVID-19 in a nationally representative sample of US adults.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 and related containment policies have caused or heightened financial stressors for many in the USA. We assessed the relation between assets, financial stressors and probable depression during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: Between 31 March 2020 and 13 April 2020, we surveyed a probability-based, nationally representative sample of US adults ages 18 and older using the COVID-19 and Life stressors Impact on Mental Health and Well-being survey (n=1441). We calculated the prevalence of probable depression using the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (cut-off ≥10) and exposure to financial stressors by financial, physical and social assets categories (household income, household savings, home ownership, educational attainment and marital status). We estimated adjusted ORs and predicted probabilities of probable depression across assets categories and COVID-19 financial stressor exposure groups. RESULTS: We found that (1) 40% of US adults experienced COVID-19-related financial stressors during this time period; (2) low assets (OR: 3.0, 95% CI 2.1 to 4.2) and COVID-19 financial stressor exposure (OR: 2.8, 95% CI 2.1 to 3.9) were each associated with higher odds of probable depression; and (3) among persons with low assets and high COVID-19 financial stressors, 42.7% had probable depression; and among persons with high assets and low COVID-19 financial stressors, 11.1% had probable depression. Persons with high assets and high COVID-19 financial stressors had a similar prevalence of probable depression (33.5%) as persons with low assets and low COVID-19 financial stressors (33.5%). The more assets a person had, the lower the level of probable depression. CONCLUSION: Populations with low assets are bearing a greater burden of mental illness during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Claiming Health as a Public Good in the Post-COVID-19 Era.

The global response to COVID-19 has been uneven and disappointing in the vast majority of countries. The United States has borne the largest absolute burden of disease globally, as COVID-19 exploited pre-existing poor population health among Americans to spread rapidly, with devastating consequences. Why does the country that spends the most on healthcare in the world have one of the worst responses to COVID-19? We argue that this is because the United States conception of health is predominantly focused on healthcare, an overwhelming investment in developing drugs and treatments, and an underinvestment in the foundational conditions that keep people healthy. COVID-19 has exposed the limits of this approach to health. In order to prevent COVID-19 and future such pandemics, we must create the conditions that can keep population-level health threats at bay. This means addressing the conditions that shape health, including economics, employment, community networks, racial disparities, how we treat older adults, and the physical layout of our communities. To do so means acknowledging health as a public good, as a transnational project with countries working together to build a healthier world. It also means acknowledging that everyone has a right to health. These aspirations should become core to the global community's health aspirations in the post-COVID-19 era.

Do assets explain the relation between race/ethnicity and probable depression in U.S. adults?

Depression is a leading cause of disability in the U.S. across all race/ethnicity groups. While non-Hispanic Black and Hispanic persons have worse physical health on most indicators than non-Hispanic White persons, the literature on the association between race/ethnicity and rates of depression is mixed. Given unequal distribution of assets across racial/ethnic groups, it is possible that social and economic differences may explain differential rates of depression across race/ethnicity groups. Using National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) data from 2007-2016, we constructed a nationally representative sample of 26,382 adults over 18 years old (11,072 non-Hispanic White, 5,610 non-Hispanic Black, 6,981 Hispanic, and 2,719 Other race). We measured symptoms of depression using the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9), with a score of 10 or more indicating probable depression. We identified three kinds of assets: financial assets (income), physical assets (home ownership), and social assets (marital status and education). We estimated the weighted prevalence of probable depression across race/ethnicity groups, odds ratios controlling for assets, and predicted probabilities of probable depression across race/ethnicity and asset groups. Three results contribute to our understanding of the differences in probable depression rates between race/ethnicity groups: 1) Non-Hispanic Black and Hispanic persons had a higher weighted prevalence of probable depression in the U.S. than non-Hispanic White persons. In models unadjusted for assets, non-Hispanic Black and Hispanic persons had 1.3 greater odds of probable depression than non-Hispanic White persons (p<0.01). 2) We found an inverse relation between assets and probable depression across all race-ethnicity groups. Also, non-Hispanic Black and Hispanic persons had fewer assets than non-Hispanic Whites. 3) When we controlled for assets, non-Hispanic Black and Hispanic persons had 0.8 times lower odds of probable depression than non-Hispanic White persons (p<0.05). Thus, when holding assets constant, minorities had better mental health than non-Hispanic White persons in the U.S. These three findings help to reconcile findings in the literature on race/ethnicity and depression. Given vastly unequal distribution of wealth in the U.S., it is not surprising that racial minorities, who hold fewer assets, would have an overall larger prevalence of mental illness, as seen in unadjusted estimates. Once assets are taken into account, Black and Hispanic persons appear to have better mental health than non-Hispanic White persons. Assets may explain much of the relation between race/ethnicity group and depression in the U.S. Future research should consider the role of assets in protecting against mental illness.

Invited Commentary: Reckoning With the Relationship Between Stressors and Suicide Attempts in a Time of COVID-19.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic presents a unique set of risk exposures for populations, which might lead to an increase in suicide. While large-scale traumatic events are known to increase psychological disorders, thus far the science has not shown a clear link between these events and suicide. In this issue of the Journal, Elbogen et al. (Am J Epidemiol. 2020;189(11):1266-1274) used representative data from the National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions (NESARC) to show that 4 dimensions of financial strain-financial debt/crisis, unemployment, past homelessness, and lower income-are associated with subsequent suicide attempts. There are 3 main lessons we can take from Elbogen et al.: First, with populations facing record-breaking unemployment, economic recession, and reduced wages, we can anticipate an increase in suicide in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic. Second, these data show the centrality of financial stressors, marking the current moment as distinct from other disasters or large-scale trauma. Third, the data teach us that financial stressors are linked and cumulative. In this way, Elbogen et al. provide a sobering harbinger of the potential effects on suicide of the collective stressors borne by the COVID-19 pandemic and other mass traumatic events that are accompanied by substantial financial stressors.

Is wealth associated with depressive symptoms in the United States?

PURPOSE: The aim of the study was to assess the relation between family wealth and depression in U.S. adults. METHODS: Participants were 5134 members of the 2015-2016 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey who were aged 18 years or older and completed the depression screener. Using the Patient Health Questionnaire and household demographics interview data, we calculate the adjusted odds of depressive symptoms for persons with low relative to high family savings, using multivariable logistic regression. We estimate predicted probabilities of having depressive symptoms for low and high family savings groups at low, middle, and high family income categories. RESULTS: Overall, 57.4% of the total weighted population had low family savings (below $20,000), and 23.7% of the weighted population had depressive symptoms. Persons with low family savings had 1.49 times higher odds (95% confidence interval, 1.01-2.21) of having depressive symptoms than persons with high family savings, controlling for gender, age, race, education, marital status, family size, and family income. Predicted probabilities of depressive symptoms were higher for low family savings groups than high family savings groups at every income level. CONCLUSIONS: Family wealth is associated with lower prevalence of current depressive symptoms in U.S. adults. Wealth may be an important determinant of population mental health, separate and independent from income.