西班牙新冠肺炎疫情期间性别认同和受教育程度的风险认知及应对机制

IF 3 3区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Matthew Bennett, Tomàs López-Jiménez, Laura Medina-Perucha, Brenda Biaani León-Gómez, Anna Berenguera, Constanza Jacques-Aviñó
{"title":"西班牙新冠肺炎疫情期间性别认同和受教育程度的风险认知及应对机制","authors":"Matthew Bennett, Tomàs López-Jiménez, Laura Medina-Perucha, Brenda Biaani León-Gómez, Anna Berenguera, Constanza Jacques-Aviñó","doi":"10.1186/s40359-025-02611-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>It is important to have a detailed understanding of the association between risk perception, coping mechanisms, and mental health outcomes during the COVID-19 syndemic across axes of inequity such as gender identity and education level.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a cross-sectional study among 2,066 adults (≥ 18 years) living in Spain via an online survey from April 8 to May 28, 2021. Anxiety and depression were the main outcomes considered to assess mental health, measured with the Generalized Anxiety Disorder 7 item (GAD-7) and Patient Health Questionnaire 9 item (PHQ-9), respectively. We analyzed the distribution of anxiety and depression levels across risk perception and coping mechanism variables, stratifying by gender identity and education level.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Anxiety and depression levels were associated with age in a gradient fashion, with the 18-30 age group reporting the highest anxiety levels in both women (aOR: 3.11, 95% CI: 1.57-6.17) and men (aOR: 4.92, 1.90-12.74). This gradient was maintained especially in individuals with university level studies. For women, higher anxiety levels were associated with perceived risk in meeting up with friends and family (aOR: 1.73, 1.12-2.67) and being out in public (aOR 2.98, 2.15-4.14), whereas men perceived more risk in occupying closed public spaces and using public transportation (e.g., aOR: 2.14, 95% CI: 1.09-4.22). Connecting with friends and family was the most effective coping mechanism. In general, women reported more effective coping mechanisms than men and findings were strongest in the population with university level studies. Likewise, men with university level studies reported more effective coping mechanisms than men without university level studies.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Women and men with university level studies reported higher risk perception and more effective coping mechanisms during the COVID-19 syndemic than individuals without a university level education. These findings reveal possible strategies for primary care and public health agencies to follow to improve mental health outcomes along different axes of inequity, especially in the case of future syndemics and public health crises.</p>","PeriodicalId":37867,"journal":{"name":"BMC Psychology","volume":"13 1","pages":"598"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12135326/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Risk perception and coping mechanisms by gender identity and education level during the COVID-19 syndemic in Spain.\",\"authors\":\"Matthew Bennett, Tomàs López-Jiménez, Laura Medina-Perucha, Brenda Biaani León-Gómez, Anna Berenguera, Constanza Jacques-Aviñó\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s40359-025-02611-5\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>It is important to have a detailed understanding of the association between risk perception, coping mechanisms, and mental health outcomes during the COVID-19 syndemic across axes of inequity such as gender identity and education level.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a cross-sectional study among 2,066 adults (≥ 18 years) living in Spain via an online survey from April 8 to May 28, 2021. Anxiety and depression were the main outcomes considered to assess mental health, measured with the Generalized Anxiety Disorder 7 item (GAD-7) and Patient Health Questionnaire 9 item (PHQ-9), respectively. We analyzed the distribution of anxiety and depression levels across risk perception and coping mechanism variables, stratifying by gender identity and education level.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Anxiety and depression levels were associated with age in a gradient fashion, with the 18-30 age group reporting the highest anxiety levels in both women (aOR: 3.11, 95% CI: 1.57-6.17) and men (aOR: 4.92, 1.90-12.74). This gradient was maintained especially in individuals with university level studies. For women, higher anxiety levels were associated with perceived risk in meeting up with friends and family (aOR: 1.73, 1.12-2.67) and being out in public (aOR 2.98, 2.15-4.14), whereas men perceived more risk in occupying closed public spaces and using public transportation (e.g., aOR: 2.14, 95% CI: 1.09-4.22). Connecting with friends and family was the most effective coping mechanism. In general, women reported more effective coping mechanisms than men and findings were strongest in the population with university level studies. Likewise, men with university level studies reported more effective coping mechanisms than men without university level studies.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Women and men with university level studies reported higher risk perception and more effective coping mechanisms during the COVID-19 syndemic than individuals without a university level education. These findings reveal possible strategies for primary care and public health agencies to follow to improve mental health outcomes along different axes of inequity, especially in the case of future syndemics and public health crises.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":37867,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"BMC Psychology\",\"volume\":\"13 1\",\"pages\":\"598\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12135326/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"BMC Psychology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s40359-025-02611-5\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s40359-025-02611-5","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:重要的是要详细了解COVID-19综合征期间跨性别认同和教育水平等不平等轴线的风险认知、应对机制和心理健康结果之间的关联。方法:我们于2021年4月8日至5月28日通过在线调查对2066名居住在西班牙的成年人(≥18岁)进行了横断面研究。焦虑和抑郁是评估心理健康的主要结果,分别用广泛性焦虑障碍7项(GAD-7)和患者健康问卷9项(PHQ-9)进行测量。我们分析了焦虑和抑郁水平在风险感知和应对机制变量中的分布,并按性别认同和教育水平分层。结果:焦虑和抑郁水平与年龄呈梯度相关,18-30岁年龄组的女性(aOR: 3.11, 95% CI: 1.57-6.17)和男性(aOR: 4.92, 1.90-12.74)的焦虑水平最高。这种梯度在具有大学水平学习的个人中尤其保持。对于女性来说,较高的焦虑水平与会见朋友和家人(aOR: 1.73, 1.12-2.67)和外出公共场所(aOR: 2.98, 2.15-4.14)的感知风险相关,而男性在占据封闭的公共空间和使用公共交通工具(aOR: 2.14, 95% CI: 1.09-4.22)的感知风险更大。与朋友和家人联系是最有效的应对机制。总的来说,女性报告的应对机制比男性更有效,这一发现在大学水平研究的人群中最为明显。同样,接受过大学教育的男性比没有接受过大学教育的男性表现出更有效的应对机制。结论:与没有受过大学教育的人相比,接受过大学教育的男女在COVID-19综合征期间表现出更高的风险认知和更有效的应对机制。这些发现揭示了初级保健和公共卫生机构可以遵循的策略,以改善不同不平等轴线上的心理健康结果,特别是在未来的疾病和公共卫生危机的情况下。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Risk perception and coping mechanisms by gender identity and education level during the COVID-19 syndemic in Spain.

Background: It is important to have a detailed understanding of the association between risk perception, coping mechanisms, and mental health outcomes during the COVID-19 syndemic across axes of inequity such as gender identity and education level.

Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional study among 2,066 adults (≥ 18 years) living in Spain via an online survey from April 8 to May 28, 2021. Anxiety and depression were the main outcomes considered to assess mental health, measured with the Generalized Anxiety Disorder 7 item (GAD-7) and Patient Health Questionnaire 9 item (PHQ-9), respectively. We analyzed the distribution of anxiety and depression levels across risk perception and coping mechanism variables, stratifying by gender identity and education level.

Results: Anxiety and depression levels were associated with age in a gradient fashion, with the 18-30 age group reporting the highest anxiety levels in both women (aOR: 3.11, 95% CI: 1.57-6.17) and men (aOR: 4.92, 1.90-12.74). This gradient was maintained especially in individuals with university level studies. For women, higher anxiety levels were associated with perceived risk in meeting up with friends and family (aOR: 1.73, 1.12-2.67) and being out in public (aOR 2.98, 2.15-4.14), whereas men perceived more risk in occupying closed public spaces and using public transportation (e.g., aOR: 2.14, 95% CI: 1.09-4.22). Connecting with friends and family was the most effective coping mechanism. In general, women reported more effective coping mechanisms than men and findings were strongest in the population with university level studies. Likewise, men with university level studies reported more effective coping mechanisms than men without university level studies.

Conclusions: Women and men with university level studies reported higher risk perception and more effective coping mechanisms during the COVID-19 syndemic than individuals without a university level education. These findings reveal possible strategies for primary care and public health agencies to follow to improve mental health outcomes along different axes of inequity, especially in the case of future syndemics and public health crises.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
BMC Psychology
BMC Psychology Psychology-Psychology (all)
CiteScore
3.90
自引率
2.80%
发文量
265
审稿时长
24 weeks
期刊介绍: BMC Psychology is an open access, peer-reviewed journal that considers manuscripts on all aspects of psychology, human behavior and the mind, including developmental, clinical, cognitive, experimental, health and social psychology, as well as personality and individual differences. The journal welcomes quantitative and qualitative research methods, including animal studies.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信