Among U.S. adults who said their mental health has changed, more women than men said their mental health had worsened during the COVID-19 pandemic and the last 10 years in general, excluding COVID-19. This statistic illustrates the percentage of U.S. adults who said their mental health has gotten worse over the last 10 years and specifically over the last year during COVID-19 as of March 2021, by gender.

Among the U.S. adults who said their mental health changed, nearly two-thirds said it worsened during the pandemic. In comparison, under half said it worsened in the last 10 years. This statistic illustrates the percentage of U.S. adults who said their mental health had gotten worse or better over the last 10 years and specifically during COVID-19 as of March 2021.

As of the first quarter of 2021, four in ten U.S. employees stated that the pandemic caused their mental health to decline. This was highest among Gen Z and lowest among Boomers. This statistic shows the percentage of U.S. employees who said COVID-19 had an impact on their mental health as of 2021, by generation.

About The Study The How Right Now campaign (HRN), which is made possible with support from the CDC Foundation and conducted in partnership with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), aims to help people cope, adapt, and be resilient throughout the COVID-19 pandemic. HRN prioritizes communities that have been disproportionately affected by COVID-19. To inform the development of this campaign and respond to the evolving needs of its audiences during the COVID-19 pandemic, HRN explored Americans’ mental health, emotional well-being and coping needs using an interrupted time series design. As part of the HRN campaign evaluation, survey data were collected in English and Spanish at three time points—May 2020, May 2021, and May 2022. Data is available for the last two waves of this survey here and at https://www.norc.org/Research/Projects/Pages/how-right-now-campaign.aspx. About the Survey These public use files contain data from two of the national probability panel surveys – May 2021 (fielded from May 26-June 1, 2021) and May 2022 (fielded from May 20-May 31, 2022). Both surveys used NORC’s AmeriSpeak® panel (https://amerispeak.norc.org/), a nationally representative probability panel of over 30,000 U.S. households.1 The total sample size for the May 2021 survey was 1,022 and the total sample size for May 2022 was 1,120. Data collection procedures and protocols were reviewed and approved by NORC's Institutional Review Board and were determined exempt under 45 CFR 46 102(1) by CDC.More information is available in the document titled "How Right Now Campaign Mental Health and Coping Data – User Guide."

This publication provides the timeliest picture available of people using NHS funded secondary mental health, learning disabilities and autism services in England. These are experimental statistics which are undergoing development and evaluation. This information will be of use to people needing access to information quickly for operational decision making and other purposes. More detailed information on the quality and completeness of these statistics is made available later in our Mental Health Bulletin: Annual Report publication series. • COVID-19 and the production of statistics Due to the coronavirus illness (COVID-19) disruption, the quality and coverage of some of our statistics has been affected, for example by an increase in non-submissions for some datasets. We are also seeing some different patterns in the submitted data. For example, fewer patients are being referred to hospital and more appointments being carried out via phone/telemedicine/email. Therefore, data should be interpreted with care over the COVID-19 period. • Early release of statistics To support the ongoing COVID-19 work, Provisional August 2021 monthly statistics were made available early and presented on our supplementary information pages. • Updates to measures For details of new measures, or changes to existing measures, see the 'Notes on measures' page. Full details of any changes are also available in the associated Metadata file.

In April 2021, around 47 percent of U.S. health workers who worked more than 75 percent of their time on COVID-19 response activities reported having post-traumatic stress disorder in the past 2 weeks, much higher compared to health workers who did not spend time working on COVID-19 response activities. This statistic illustrates the prevalence of depression, anxiety, PTSD, and suicidal ideation in the past 2 weeks among public health workers in the United States as of April 2021, by share of time spent on COVID–19 response activities.

This is the second (wave 2) in a series of follow up reports to the Mental Health and Young People Survey (MHCYP) 2017, exploring the mental health of children and young people in February/March 2021, during the Coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic and changes since 2017. Experiences of family life, education, and services during the COVID-19 pandemic are also examined. The sample for the Mental Health Survey for Children and Young People, 2021 (MHCYP 2021), wave 2 follow up was based on 3,667 children and young people who took part in the MHCYP 2017 survey, with both surveys also drawing on information collected from parents. Cross-sectional analyses are presented, addressing three primary aims: Aim 1: Comparing mental health between 2017 and 2021 – the likelihood of a mental disorder has been assessed against completion of the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) in both years in Topic 1 by various demographics. Aim 2: Describing life during the COVID-19 pandemic - Topic 2 examines the circumstances and experiences of children and young people in February/March 2021 and the preceding months, covering: COVID-19 infection and symptoms. Feelings about social media use. Family connectedness. Family functioning. Education, including missed days of schooling, access to resources, and support for those with Special Educational Needs and Disabilities (SEND). Changes in circumstances. How lockdown and restrictions have affected children and young people’s lives. Seeking help for mental health concerns. Aim 3: Present more detailed data on the mental health, circumstances and experiences of children and young people by ethnic group during the coronavirus pandemic (where sample sizes allow). The data is broken down by gender and age bands of 6 to 10 year olds and 11 to 16 year olds for all categories, and 17 to 22 years old for certain categories where a time series is available, as well as by whether a child is unlikely to have a mental health disorder, possibly has a mental health disorder and probably has a mental health disorder. This study was funded by the Department of Health and Social Care, commissioned by NHS Digital, and carried out by the Office for National Statistics, the National Centre for Social Research, University of Cambridge and University of Exeter.

BackgroundAlthough a psychiatric history might be an independent risk factor for COVID-19 infection and mortality, no studies have systematically investigated how different clusters of pre-existing mental disorders may affect COVID-19 clinical outcomes or showed how the coexistence of mental disorder clusters is related to COVID-19 clinical outcomes.MethodsUsing a retrospective cohort study design, a total of 476,775 adult patients with lab-confirmed and probable COVID-19 between March 06, 2020 and April 14, 2021 in South Carolina, United States were included in the current study. The electronic health record data of COVID-19 patients were linked to all payer-based claims data through the SC Revenue and Fiscal Affairs Office. Pre-existing mental disorder diagnoses from Jan 2, 2019 to Jan 14, 2021 were extracted from the patients' healthcare utilization data via ICD-10 codes.ResultsThere is an elevated risk of COVID-19-related hospitalization and death among participants with pre-existing mental disorders adjusting for key socio-demographic and comorbidity covariates. Co-occurrence of any two clusters was positively associated with COVID-19-related hospitalization and death. The odds ratio of being hospitalized was 1.26 (95% CI: 1.151, 1.383) for patients with internalizing and externalizing disorders, 1.65 (95% CI: 1.298, 2.092) for internalizing and thought disorders, 1.76 (95% CI: 1.217, 2.542) for externalizing and thought disorders, and 1.64 (95% CI: 1.274, 2.118) for three clusters of mental disorders.ConclusionsPre-existing internalizing disorders and thought disorders are positively related to COVID-19 hospitalization and death. Co-occurrence of any two clusters of mental disorders have elevated risk of COVID-19-related hospitalization and death compared to those with a single cluster.

Rates of mental health symptoms, particularly anxiety and depression, have increased significantly in college students in the past decade along with utilization of mental health resources. The COVID-19 pandemic created an additional source of stressors to an already challenging landscape of college transition. COVID-19 has been associated with an increase of anxiety among college students, particularly first year students, entering college in Fall 2020. The shifts in policy (e.g., federal, state, and college) accruing medical data, and vaccine availability between Fall 2020 and Fall 2021 provide an opportunity to examine the role of COVID-19 experiences in the transition to college for these two first-year student cohorts. This study examined two cohorts of first-year students, Fall 2020 and 2021, to better understand the relationship between COVID-19 experiences, psychosocial correlates, and mental health symptoms. Results suggest that for students in our Fall 2020 cohort COVID-19 experiences played a distinct role in the prediction of mental health symptoms while in Fall 2021 COVID-19 experiences did not uniquely contribute to prediction of mental health symptoms. These findings have implications for mental health interventions for first-year students transitioning to college.

When the COVID-19 pandemic began, U.S. college students reported increased anxiety and depression. This study examines mental health among U.S college students during the subsequent 2020–2021 academic year by surveying students at the end of the fall 2020 and the spring 2021 semesters. Our data provide cross-sectional snapshots and longitudinal changes. Both surveys included the PSS, GAD-7, PHQ-8, questions about students’ academic experiences and sense of belonging in online, in-person, and hybrid classes, and additional questions regarding behaviors, living circumstances, and demographics. The spring 2021 study included a larger, stratified sample of eight demographic groups, and we added scales to examine relationships between mental health and students’ perceptions of their universities’ COVID-19 policies. Our results show higher-than-normal frequencies of mental health struggles throughout the 2020–2021 academic year, and these were substantially higher for female college students, but by spring 2021, the levels did not vary substantially by race/ethnicity, living circumstances, vaccination status, or perceptions of university COVID-19 policies. Mental health struggles inversely correlated with scales of academic and non-academic experiences, but the struggles positively correlated with time on social media. In both semesters, students reported more positive experiences with in-person classes, though all class types were rated higher in the spring semester, indicating improvements in college students’ course experiences as the pandemic continued. Furthermore, our longitudinal data indicate the persistence of mental health struggles across semesters. Overall, these studies show factors that contributed to mental health challenges among college students as the pandemic continued.

The dataset includes all necessary data to reproduce the analysis ran in our study.It includes 254 participants' scores for:- 24 character strengths- 6 virtues - GHQ-12 (mental health) at Time 1 and 2- PTGI (post-traumatic growth)- occupational changes (work at T1 and T2)- gender- age

The overall goal for this project was to reduce the incidence of COVID-19, hospitalization, and mortality among adults with serious mental illness (SMI) and intellectual disabilities/developmental disabilities (IDD) in congregate living settings (i.e., group homes) in Massachusetts, as well as to reduce COVID-19 incidence among staff who work in these settings. The research team was guided by two comparative effectiveness questions: With the goal of prioritizing and making actionable best practices available as resources, what is the comparative effectiveness of various types and intensities of preventative interventions (e.g., screening, isolation, contact tracing, hand hygiene, physical distancing, use of face masks) in reducing rates of COVID-19, related hospitalizations, and related mortality in this population? With the goal of effectively implementing best practices, what is the most effective implementation strategy to reduce rates of COVID-19 in this population: using tailored best practices (TBP) with SMI/IDD residents and staff of group homes in mind, or general best practices (GBP) from state and federal standard guidelines for all congregate care settings? The specific aims of this study were as follows: Aim 1a. Synthesize existing baseline data collected by 6 state behavioral health agencies on COVID-19 rates, hospitalization, mortality, and use of infection prevention practices. Aim 1b. Collect stakeholder input via surveys and virtual focus groups on staff and resident experiences and on barriers/facilitators to implementing recommended preventative practices. Aims 2a and 2b. Determine the comparative effectiveness of various COVID-19 preventative practices by (Aim 2a) using a validated simulation model to estimate COVID-19 spread in group homes and (Aim 2b) obtaining stakeholder input on prioritizing and defining tailored best practices for implementation. Aim 3. Compare the effectiveness of TBPs with GBPs by using a hybrid effectiveness-implementation cluster randomized controlled trial. Data collected to answer Aims 1 and 2 served as the foundation for designing the Aim 3 trial. Data for the trial were collected in 3-month intervals beginning January 2021 (baseline) until October 2022 (15-month follow-up). Residents and staff were sampled from approximately 400 group homes. Primary implementation outcome measures were COVID-19 vaccination rates and fidelity scores. The primary effectiveness outcome measure was COVID-19 infection. Notes: This collection contains only data from Aim 1a and Aim 3. Throughout the data and documentation, "intellectual and/or developmental disabilities" is abbreviated as both IDD and ID/DD.

Descriptive statistics of time-varying variables across 3 periods (weighted).

In 2020 and 2021, respondents noted problems with cumulative tension in themselves during the COVID-19 pandemic. Nearly one in four Poles stated they were easily provoked, and almost one in five experienced outbursts of anger with increased frequency.

For further information about the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic, please visit our dedicated Facts and Figures page.

Anxiety and depression are the most prevalent classes of mental illnesses; rates of anxiety and depression have been exacerbated due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Vulnerability to anxiety and depression are affected by risk and resilience factors, such as personality constructs. Recent research (e.g., Lyon et al, 2020; 2021) suggests that, out of all 30 NEO-PI-R personality constructs, variance in anxiety and depression are explained by a small number of personality constructs. However it is unclear which mechanisms mediate the relationship between these personality constructs and anxiety and depression. The purpose of this study was to investigate the mediating effect of emotion regulation strategies on the relationship between personality constructs and COVID-related anxiety and depression. Data were collected from a sample of 210 students at the University of Manchester. Measures included a select number of narrow Big Five personality facets which explain variance in anxiety and depression (facets depression, assertiveness, gregariousness, positive emotion and competence), select COPE Inventory strategies associated with coping with pandemics, and COVID-related anxiety and depression. Measures of COPE strategies and mental health were adapted to refer to coping and mental health in response to COVID pandemic.

This publication provides the most timely picture available of people using NHS funded secondary mental health, learning disabilities and autism services in England. These are experimental statistics which are undergoing development and evaluation. This information will be of use to people needing access to information quickly for operational decision making and other purposes. More detailed information on the quality and completeness of these statistics is made available later in our Mental Health Bulletin: Annual Report publication series. • COVID-19 and the production of statistics Due to the coronavirus illness (COVID-19) disruption, the quality and coverage of some of our statistics has been affected, for example by an increase in non-submissions for some datasets. We are also seeing some different patterns in the submitted data. For example, fewer patients are being referred to hospital and more appointments being carried out via phone/telemedicine/email. Therefore, data should be interpreted with care over the COVID-19 period. • Early release of statistics To support the ongoing COVID-19 work, Provisional April 2021 monthly statistics were made available early and presented on our supplementary information pages. Please see the 'Supplementary information requests' section below. • Annual Statistics This publication includes annual statistics for the 2020-21 reporting year. Included are the number of People in contact with services - April 2020 to March 2021, and the number of People in contact with services with a hospital provider spell - April 2020 to March 2021, with age group breakdowns for both counts. In addition, the number of children and young people accessing NHS funded community mental health services (MHS69) - April 2020 to March 2021 are published here. Further annual statistics will be published in the annual Mental Health Bulletin. • Updates to measures For details of new measures, or changes to existing measures, see the 'Notes on Measures' page. Full details of any changes are also available in the associated Metadata file.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, various lockdown policies were put in place by the governments in different countries and different levels, which effectively curbed the spread of the virus, but also cause substantial damage to the mental health of local residents. We use statistics provided by the Household Pulse Survey and OxCGRT between 23 April 2020 and 30 August 2021 to analyze the impact of lockdown on overall mental health levels in US states during the COVID-19 pandemic at the macro level. The results show that the lockdown policies implemented by the state governments lead to a deterioration in psychological conditions, and this relationship varies to some extent depending on the level of high-quality economic support, that the state governments implement to alleviate the symptoms of depression and anxiety associated with the lockdown. Therefore, we argue that although lockdown policies are necessary during the COVID-19 pandemic, further government efforts are needed to give high-quality economic and mental health support to mitigate the negative effects of lockdown on mental health.

Get detailed national estimates from the 2021 National Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH). The tables provide comprehensive statistics on substance use, mental health, and treatment in the United States. Unlike previous NSDUH detailed tables, there are no trend tables comparing estimates to previous years for 2021. This is because changes in survey methodology mean the indicators are not comparable to past NSDUH estimates.The tables are based on the NSDUH survey, which interviews people ages 12 or older in the civilian, noninstitutionalized population. In the tables, indicators are broken out by a variety of demographic, geographic, and economic variables.The following topics are covered, among others: drug, alcohol, nicotine, and tobacco product use and initiation; substance use disorder (SUD); substance use risk and protective factors; availability of substance use treatment; any mental illness (AMI) and serious mental illness (SMI); major depressive episode (MDE); suicidal thoughts and behaviors; serious psychological distress (SPD); mental health service utilization; treatment for depression; and co-occurrence of mental health issues and SUDs. In 2021, these tables also present the perceived effects of the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on substance use and mental health.All of the tables can be downloaded in a zip file which contains both an html and PDF file containing every table. Alternatively, users can open the clickable Table of Contents to go to a particular section. Click on “PE” to get to a population estimate or percentage table, and “SE” to get a standard error table.

Use this summary report to properly interpret 2021 NSDUH estimates of substance use and mental health issues. The report accompanies theannual detailed tablesand covers overall methodology, key definitions for measures and terms used in 2021 NSDUH reports and tables, and selected analyses of the measures and how they should be interpreted.The report is organized into six chapters:Introduction.Description of the survey, including information about the sample design, data collection procedures, and key aspects of data processing such as development of the analysis weights. The report also includes methodological changes and related issues in the 2021 NSDUH due to COVID-19.Technical details on the statistical methods and measurement, such as suppression criteria for unreliable estimates, statistical testing procedures, issues around selected substance use and mental health measures, and the impact of methodological changes on response rates.Special topics related to prescription psychotherapeutic drugs.A comparison between NSDUH and other sources of data on substance use and mental health issues, including data sources for populations outside the NSDUH target population.A more in-depth view of special methodological issues for the 2021 NSDUH, including the results of special analyses that led SAMHSA to not compare estimates from 2021 to estimates from previous years.An appendix covers key definitions used in NSDUH reports and tables.