Infectious Disease Outbreak and Post-Traumatic Stress Symptoms: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Abstract

Background: As one of the most widely researched consequence of traumatic events, the prevalence of post-traumatic stress symptoms (PTSS) among people exposed to the trauma resulting from infectious disease outbreak varies greatly across studies. This review aimed at examining the pooled prevalence of PTSS among people exposed to the trauma resulting from infectious disease outbreak, summarizing the possible causes of the inconsistencies in the current estimates.

Methods: Systematic searches of databases were conducted for literature published on PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, PsycArticles, and Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) until 14 October 2020. Statistical analyses were performed using R software (registration number: CRD42020182366).

Results: About 106 studies were included. The results showed that the pooled prevalence of PTSS among the general population exposed to the trauma resulting from infectious disease outbreak was 24.20% (95% CI: 18.54–30.53%), the pooled prevalence of PTSS among healthcare workers was 24.35% (95% CI: 18.38–1.51%), the pooled prevalence of PTSS among patients with infectious disease was 28.83% (95% CI: 18.53–44.86%), and the pooled prevalence of PTSS among suspected cases of infectious disease was 25.04% (95% CI: 18.05–34.73%). Mortality rate was a significant contributor to heterogeneity.

Conclusions: Evidence suggests that PTSS were very common among people exposed to the trauma resulting from infectious disease outbreak. Health policymakers should consider both short-term and long-term preventive strategy of PTSS.

Background

Infectious disease poses a serious threat to public health. Over the past two decades, novel viruses continuing to emerge, the number of reported outbreaks of highly pathogenic or highly transmitted infectious diseases has increased, such as severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) in 2003, 2009 influenza A (H1N1) in 2009, and Ebola virus disease (Ebola) in 2014

(Houlihan and Whitworth, 2019). At the end of 2019, a new type of infectious disease emerged, which is known as coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). As of December 10, 2020, over 66.2 million cases of COVID-19 and about 1.5 million deaths have been reported to the WHO (WHO, 2020). The outbreak of infectious disease can spread rapidly, causing enormous losses to individual health, national economy, and social well-being (Steele et al., 2016).

The psychological effects of infectious disease outbreak can be deleterious and far-reaching. Previous research indicates high prevalence rates of clinically relevant post-traumatic stress symptoms (PTSS) among people exposed to the trauma resulting from infectious disease outbreak (such as the outbreak of SARS; Gardner and Moallef, 2015). Patients with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD)-related symptoms live under the shadow of past trauma. According to the Diagnostic and Statistics of Mental Disorders, the fifth edition (DSM-5), the clinical features of PTSD include persistent intrusion symptoms, persistent avoidance of stimuli, negative alterations in cognition or mood, and marked alterations in arousal and reactivity, all of which are related to traumatic events (Association, 2013). PTSS could cause clinically significant distress or impairment in social, occupational, or other important areas of functioning (Greene et al., 2016). When an infectious disease breaks out, people may experience many types of psychological trauma, such as directly suffering from the symptoms and traumatic treatment, witness of suffering, and struggling and dying of patients (Fiorillo and Gorwood, 2020). Additionally, individuals may experience the fear of realistic or unrealistic of infection, social isolation, exclusion, and stigmatization, as patients, care and help providers, or even the general public (Kisely et al., 2020; Morganstein and Ursano, 2020). As one of the most widely researched consequence of traumatic events, the prevalence of PTSS among people exposed to the trauma resulting from infectious disease outbreak varies greatly across studies (Lancee et al., 2008; Jung et al., 2020). In order to provide more reliable prevention, it is necessary to determine a more accurate estimation of the prevalence of PTSS among people exposed to the trauma resulting from infectious disease outbreak and to explore the possible causes of the inconsistencies in the current estimates.

Currently, control of the epidemic of COVID-19 is still the dominant task of the whole world, millions of people are scared and even panic of the possible loss of health, life, and wealth (Dutheil et al., 2020). A few epidemic studies reported that experience and witness of the suffering related to COVID-19 resulted in a high prevalence of PTSD-related symptoms (Kisely et al., 2020; Rogers et al., 2020). Although it is too early to predict how many people worldwide will be infected with the virus, it is believed that the numbers of case and death will continue to increase in the following months. Some psychologists draw attention toward PTSD as the second tsunami of the COVID-19 pandemic (Dutheil et al., 2020). For taking effective measures to reduce the psychological sequelae caused by COVID-19 across the world, understanding how infectious disease outbreak cause PTSD and who might be vulnerable are essential. This review aimed at examining the pooled prevalence of PTSS among people exposed to the trauma resulting from infectious disease outbreak (including infectious diseases over the past 20 years and COVID-19), summarizing the possible causes of the inconsistencies in the current estimates, and examining potentially vulnerable populations, try to provide a reference for COVID-19 and possible outbreak of infectious diseases in the future.

Materials and Methods

This review was reported in accordance with the PRISMA guideline and the Meta-analyses Of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) guidelines (Stroup et al., 2000; Moher et al., 2009). The protocol of this review is registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (registration number: CRD42020182366). See Supplementary Material for the details.

Search Strategy

PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, PsycArticle, and Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) were independently searched by two reviewers (DQ and YLL), with no restrictions on date or language of publication up until 25 April 2020, and an update search was conducted on 14 October 2020. The following search terms were used: “Infectious disease” (including “infection,” “infectious,” “infectious disease,” “public health emergency,” “public health event,” “SARS,” “Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome,” “H1N1,” “flu,” “influenza,” “Ebola,” “MERS,” “Middle East Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus,” “coronavirus,” and “COVID-19”); “Post-traumatic stress disorder” (including “Posttraumatic stress disorder,” “posttraumatic syndrome,” “PTSD,” “stress disorder,” “post-traumatic,” and “post traumatic syndrome”). See Supplementary Table 1 for a full search strategy.

Study Selection

Studies were included if they meet the following criteria: (1) the study was observational study; (2) information about the prevalence of PTSS among people exposed to the trauma resulting from infectious disease outbreak; (3) the full article was written in English or Chinese; and (4) these outbreaks were SARS, H1N1, H7N9, MERS, Ebola virus disease, Zika virus disease, and COVID-19. Studies were excluded if: (1) the report was a review, comments, meta-analysis, or protocol; (2) the participants with comorbid symptoms or chronic disease (such as mental illness, cancer, etc.); and (3) the report was duplicate results.

Data Extraction

Two reviewers (DQ and YLL) checked the titles, abstracts, and full texts of the initial search results independently. Data were extracted on first author, year of publication, country or area, type of disease, population, survey period, sample size, response rate, percentage of male participants, average age of participants, instruments used to identify PTSS, prevalence of PTSS, and quality score of the included studies. Any discrepancies that emerged in these procedures were discussed and resolved by involving a third reviewer (SYX).

Quality Assessment

Two independent reviewers (JH and FYOY) used the established guidelines, the Loney criteria, to evaluate the methodological quality of the included studies, which has been widely used to evaluate observational studies (Loney et al., 1998; Sanderson et al., 2007). The included papers were scored according to eight criteria, such as definition of participants, study design, sampling method, response rate, sample size, and appropriateness of measurement and analysis. The scores range from 0 to 8, with a score of 0–3 as low quality, 4–6 as moderate, and 7–8 as high (Qiu et al., 2020). See Supplementary Table 3 for details on the quality assessment.

Statistical Analyses

When data were available for three or more studies, the prevalence was combined. When there were 10 or more studies, the quantitative subgroup analysis was conducted. All the statistical analyses were performed using the “meta” (4.12-0) and “metafor” package (2.4-0) of R version 4.0.0. Between-study heterogeneity was evaluated by Cochran's Q-test and quantified by the I² statistic, with values 50% or more indicating possible heterogeneity (Higgins et al., 2003; Ades et al., 2005). The pooled prevalence of PTSS was combined using the Logit transformation method or Log transformation method by a random effects model if significant heterogeneity was observed across studies (when p < 0.05, I² > 50%). If more than one dataset was reported for the same group of participants, the outcomes that were assessed at the baseline were used. In order to compare the prevalence from different studies, the subgroup meta-analysis was conducted. Because the subgroup analyses should be interpreted with caution (Jike et al., 2018), we planned a priori to limit our subgroup analyses to a small number of baseline characteristics including area, sample size, type of disease, mortality rate of disease, survey time after the outbreak, gender, age, assessment tool, and quality score. The difference between subgroups was examined using the Cochran's Q chi-square tests. Mixed-model meta-regression analyses were performed by using the Freeman–Tukey double arcsine method to explore potential moderators on the heterogeneity. Publication bias was investigated by Egger's test. To evaluate the consistency of the results, sensitivity analysis was performed by removing each study individually. All the statistical tests were two-sided, with a significance threshold of p < 0.05.

Results

Literature Search

As shown in Figure 1, a total of 6,612 references were identified. Among them, 2,953 duplicates were removed. By screening titles and abstracts, 3,019 irrelevant articles were excluded. A total of 288 potentially relevant full-text articles were independently assessed based on the selection criteria. Further, 182 studies were excluded because of the following reasons: duplicate articles or results (n = 15), review (n = 1), did not provide data on PTSS (n = 114), not infectious disease (n = 44), unable to locate full text (n = 7), and not in English or Chinese (n = 1). Finally, 106 eligible studies were included in this review. See Figure 1 for the details.

Figure 1

Study Characteristics

One hundred and six papers met the inclusion criteria. Of the included studies, 78 were of COVID-19 (Alkhamees et al., 2020; Barbato and Thomas, 2020; Blekas et al., 2020; Bo et al., 2020; Caillet et al., 2020; Cai X. et al., 2020; Cai Z. et al., 2020; Cardel et al., 2020; Castelli et al., 2020; Chang and Park, 2020; Chen B. et al., 2020; Chen et al., 2020; Chew et al., 2020; Chi et al., 2020; Civantos et al., 2020a,b; Cortes-Alvarez et al., 2020; Di Tella et al., 2020; Dobson et al., 2020; El-Zoghby et al., 2020; Fekih-Romdhane et al., 2020; Forte et al., 2020; Giusti et al., 2020; Gonzalez Ramirez et al., 2020; Gonzalez-Sanguino et al., 2020; Guo et al., 2020; Hao et al., 2020; Huang et al., 2020; Karatzias et al., 2020; Lahav, 2020; Lai et al., 2020; Lange et al., 2020; Le et al., 2020; Leng, 2020; Leng et al., 2020; Li, 2020; Liang L. et al., 2020; Liang S. W. et al., 2020; Li et al., 2020,a,b; Li G. et al., 2020; Lijun et al., 2020; Liu C. H. et al., 2020; Liu D. et al., 2020; Liu N. et al., 2020; Liu Y. et al., 2020; Li X. C. et al., 2020; Li X. et al., 2020; Luceno-Moreno et al., 2020; Ma et al., 2020; Nie et al., 2020; Qi et al., 2020; Riello et al., 2020; Rodriguez-Rey et al., 2020; Rossi et al., 2020a,b; Seyahi et al., 2020; Sherman et al., 2020; Si et al., 2020; Song et al., 2020; Tan et al., 2020; Tang et al., 2020; Tee et al., 2020; Traunmuller et al., 2020; Varshney et al., 2020; Wang et al., 2020; Wesemann et al., 2020; Xie et al., 2020; Yin et al., 2020; Yuan et al., 2020; Zhang and Ma, 2020a,b; Zhang C. et al., 2020; Zhang et al., 2020; Zhao et al., 2020; Zhou et al., 2020) (Alkhamees et al., 2020; Barbato and Thomas, 2020; Blekas et al., 2020; Bo et al., 2020; Caillet et al., 2020; Cai X. et al., 2020; Cai Z. et al., 2020; Cardel et al., 2020; Castelli et al., 2020; Chang and Park, 2020; Chen B. et al., 2020; Chen et al., 2020; Chew et al., 2020; Chi et al., 2020; Civantos et al., 2020a,b; Cortes-Alvarez et al., 2020; Di Tella et al., 2020; Dobson et al., 2020; El-Zoghby et al., 2020; Fekih-Romdhane et al., 2020; Forte et al., 2020; Giusti et al., 2020; Gonzalez Ramirez et al., 2020; Gonzalez-Sanguino et al., 2020; Guo et al., 2020; Karatzias et al., 2020; Lahav, 2020; Lange et al., 2020; Le et al., 2020; Leng, 2020; Leng et al., 2020; Li, 2020; Liang S. W. et al., 2020; Li et al., 2020a,b; Li G. et al., 2020; Lijun et al., 2020; Liu C. H. et al., 2020; Liu D. et al., 2020; Liu Y. et al., 2020; Li X. C. et al., 2020; Li X. et al., 2020; Luceno-Moreno et al., 2020; Ma et al., 2020; Nie et al., 2020; Qi et al., 2020; Riello et al., 2020; Rodriguez-Rey et al., 2020; Rossi et al., 2020a,b; Seyahi et al., 2020; Sherman et al., 2020; Si et al., 2020; Song et al., 2020; Tan et al., 2020; Tee et al., 2020; Traunmuller et al., 2020; Varshney et al., 2020; Wesemann et al., 2020; Xie et al., 2020; Yuan et al., 2020; Zhang and Ma, 2020a,b; Zhang C. et al., 2020; Zhang et al., 2020; Zhao et al., 2020; Zhou et al., 2020), two of Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) (Lee et al., 2018; Jung et al., 2020), one of Ebola virus disease (Jalloh et al., 2018), one of H7N9 (Tang et al., 2017), two of H1N1 (Xu et al., 2011; Luyt et al., 2012), and the remaining 22 of SARS (Chan and Huak, 2004; Fang et al., 2004; Hawryluck et al., 2004; Sin and Huak, 2004; Chen et al., 2005; Tie-ying et al., 2005; Wu et al., 2005, 2009; Yong et al., 2005; Hongsheng et al., 2006; Kwek et al., 2006; Lee et al., 2006; Maunder et al., 2006; Zhongguo et al., 2006; Laiqi et al., 2007; Lin et al., 2007; Su et al., 2007; Lancee et al., 2008; Reynolds et al., 2008; Hong et al., 2009; Mak et al., 2010; Sim et al., 2010). Six papers were in Chinese, and the remainder in English. Of these, 93 were cross-sectional studies, nine were longitudinal designs, and four were case control studies. Most of the included studies were from Asia, such as China, Singapore, and South Korea. See Table 1 for the details. From the 106 papers, five (4.72%) studies were rated as high quality, 93 (87.73%) were rated as moderate, and eight (7.55%) were rated as low quality. Details of the methodological quality assessments of all 106 studies are showed in Supplementary Table 3.

Pooled Prevalence of Post-traumatic Stress Symptoms Among the General Population

There were 51 studies reported the prevalence of PTSS among the general population. The forest plot in Figure 2 depicts the details. A total of 78,459 people exposed to the trauma resulting from an epidemic of infectious disease were identified in the 51 articles, of which 25,826 were reported with PTSS. The random effects model was used to determine the pooled prevalence (I² = 99.70%, p < 0.001), the pooled prevalence of PTSS among people exposed to the trauma resulting from infectious disease outbreak was 24.20%, with a 95% CI of 18.54–30.53%.

Figure 2

The details of subgroup analyses are presented in Table 2. There were no significant differences in the prevalence of PTSS between age and gender (Q = 0.08 and 0.16, p > 0.05). Significant difference in the prevalence of PTSS between different types of disease was observed, the pooled prevalence of PTSS among people influenced by COVID-19 was higher than that for people influenced by SARS, Ebola and H1N1 (26.75 vs. 16.42 vs. 15.99 vs. 2.03%; Q = 117.12, p < 0.05). In addition, a higher mortality rate is associated with a lower prevalence of PTSS (24.39 vs. 15.99%; Q = 8.26, p < 0.05). The pooled prevalence of PTSS among people in the Eastern Mediterranean region was higher than people in the Western Pacific region, the Southeast Asia region, the America region, the European region, and the Africa region (37.74 vs. 33.23 vs. 29.25 vs. 24.00 vs. 20.78 vs. 15.99%; Q = 114.16, p < 0.05). Furthermore, there were significant differences in the prevalence of PTSS between different survey time after the outbreak; closer survey time to the point of infectious disease outbreak was associated with a higher prevalence of PTSS (25.96 vs. 5.95%; Q = 7.49, p < 0.05). There were significant differences in the prevalence of PTSS between studies used different assessment tools (24.44 vs. 14.00%; Q = 12.18, p < 0.05). In addition, significant difference in the prevalence of PTSS between studies with different quality scores was observed, articles with the highest quality scores showed a high prevalence (12.57 vs. 12.41 vs. 25.86%; Q = 19.00, p < 0.05). A multivariate meta-regression was carried out to explore the origin of heterogeneity accounted for by the variables, such as type of disease and survey time after the outbreak. However, no significant contributor was found. See Table 5 for the details.

The results of the Egger's test showed that publication bias was not found in this study (t = −2.425, p = 0.208). When each study was excluded one by one, the recalculated combined results did not change significantly. The pooled prevalence of PTSS ranged from 23.29% (95% CI: 17.91–29.70%) to 25.13% (95% CI: 19.43–31.85%), and the I² statistic varied from 99.70% to 99.80%. The results indicate that no individual study significantly influenced the overall results.

Pooled Prevalence of Post-traumatic Stress Symptoms Among the Healthcare Workers

A total of 41 studies reported the prevalence of PTSS among the healthcare workers. The forest plot in Figure 3 depicts the details. A total of 38,250 healthcare workers exposed to the trauma resulting from an epidemic of infectious disease were identified in the 41 articles, of which 9,071 were reported with PTSS. The random effects model was used to determine the pooled prevalence (I² = 99.40%, p < 0.001), the pooled prevalence of PTSS among healthcare workers exposed to the trauma resulting from infectious disease outbreak was 24.35%, with a 95% CI of 18.38–31.51%.

Figure 3

The details of subgroup analyses are presented in Table 3. There were no significant differences in the prevalence of PTSS between age, gender, mortality rate of disease, sample size, and quality score (Q = 0.21, 0.19, 3.78, 2.54, and 4.65, p > 0.05). Significant difference in the prevalence of PTSS between different types of disease was observed, and the pooled prevalence of PTSS among people influenced by MERS was higher than that for the people influenced by COVID-19, H7N9, and SARS (52.77 vs. 29.64 vs. 20.59 vs. 11.80%; Q = 351.95, p < 0.05). In addition, a higher mortality rate is associated with a higher prevalence of PTSS (23.19 vs. 42.04%; Q = 3.78, p < 0.05). The pooled prevalence of PTSS among people in the European region was higher than people in the America region, the Western Pacific region, and the Southeast Asia region (34.47 vs. 29.10 vs. 21.70 vs. 7.94%; Q = 70.59, p < 0.05). Furthermore, there were significant differences in the prevalence of PTSS between different survey time after the outbreak, and closer survey time to the point of infectious disease outbreak is associated with a higher prevalence of PTSS (29.04 vs. 10.42%; Q = 10.09, p < 0.05). There were significant differences in the prevalence of PTSS between studies used different assessment tools (24.87 vs. 8.93%; Q = 5.84, p < 0.05). A multivariate meta-regression was carried out to explore the origin of heterogeneity accounted for by the variables including type of disease, mortality rate, survey time after the outbreak, age, gender, quality score, and sample size. The results of meta-regression showed that mortality rate of disease was a significant contributor to heterogeneity (accounted for 16.81% of the heterogeneity). See Table 5 for the details.

The results of the Egger's test showed that publication bias was not found in this study (t = 0.728, p = 0.470). When each study was excluded one by one, the recalculated combined results did not change significantly. The pooled prevalence of PTSS ranged from 23.22% (95% CI: 17.69–29.84%) to 25.62% (95% CI: 19.68–32.62%), and the I² statistic varied from 99.20 to 99.40%. The results indicate that no individual study significantly influenced the overall results.

Pooled Prevalence of Post-traumatic Stress Symptoms Among Patients With Infectious Disease

A total of 15 studies reported the prevalence of PTSS among the patients. The forest plot in Figure 4 depicts the details. A total of 2,666 patients with infectious disease were identified in the 15 articles, of which 1,125 were reported with PTSS. The random effects model was used to determine the pooled prevalence (I² = 98.60%, p < 0.001), and the pooled prevalence of PTSS among patients with infectious disease was 28.83%, with a 95% CI of 18.53–44.86%.

Figure 4

The details of subgroup analyses are presented in Table 4. There were no significant differences in the prevalence of PTSS between age, gender, type of disease, region, survey time after outbreak, diagnosis tool, sample size, and quality score (p > 0.05). A significant difference in the prevalence of PTSS between studies with different quality scores was observed (5.64 vs. 35.45 vs. 9.79%; Q = 31.65, p < 0.05). A multivariate meta-regression was carried out to explore the origin of heterogeneity accounted for by the variables, such as type of disease and survey time after the outbreak. However, no significant contributor was found. See Table 5 for the details.

The results of the Egger's test showed that publication bias was not found in this study (t = −6.138, p = 3.553). When each study was excluded one by one, the recalculated combined results did not change significantly. The pooled prevalence of PTSS ranged from 23.22% (95% CI: 17.69–29.84%) to 32.23% (95% CI: 20.75–50.05%), and the I² statistic varied from 95.40 to 98.7%. The results indicate that no individual study significantly influenced the overall results.

Pooled Prevalence of Post-traumatic Stress Symptoms Among the Suspected Cases of Infectious Disease

A total of three studies reported the prevalence of PTSS among the suspected cases. The forest plot in Figure 5 depicts the details. A total of 525 suspected cases of infectious disease exposed to the trauma resulting from an epidemic of infectious disease were identified in the three articles, of which 139 were reported with PTSS. The random effects model was used to determine the pooled prevalence (I² = 74.50%, p < 0.001), the pooled prevalence of PTSS among suspected cases exposed to the trauma resulting from infectious disease outbreak was 25.04%, with a 95% CI of 18.05–34.73%.

Figure 5

Discussion

Key Findings

This review has highlighted the importance of considering the psychological impacts of people exposed to the trauma resulting from infectious disease outbreak. The results showed that the pooled prevalence of PTSS among the general population was 24.20% (95% CI: 18.54–30.53%), the pooled prevalence of PTSS among the healthcare workers was 24.35% (95% CI: 18.38–31.51%), the pooled prevalence of PTSS among patients with infectious disease was 28.83% (95% CI: 18.53–44.86%), and the pooled prevalence of PTSS among the suspected cases of infectious disease was 25.04% (95% CI: 18.05–34.73%), and several factors including type of disease, mortality rate of disease, region, survey time after outbreak, assessment tool, sample size, and quality score were associated with PTSS. Mortality rate of disease was a significant moderator for heterogeneity. Further research is needed to identify effective strategies for preventing and treating PTSS among people exposed to the trauma resulting from infectious disease outbreak.

Comparison With the Literature

The pooled prevalence of PTSS among different population exposed to the trauma resulting from infectious disease outbreak in this study ranged from 24.20 to 28.83%, which was higher than flood survivors (15.74%) and hurricane survivors (Liu et al., 2017; Wang et al., 2019), but similar to earthquake survivors (Dai et al., 2016) and civilian war survivors (23.66–26.00%) (Morina et al., 2018). Compared with infectious diseases, some natural disasters, such as flood and hurricane, can be predicted, whereas earthquakes and infectious disease were often happened suddenly and without a warning and pose a huge threat to health and property of people in a short period of time (Dai et al., 2016). Therefore, earthquakes might have caused more damage to mental health of people. Relative to natural disasters, wars often last longer, and survivors directly exposed to trauma continuously (Morina et al., 2018). Furthermore, the pooled prevalence of PTSS among patients with infectious disease was much higher than healthcare workers, the general population, and suspected cases of infectious diseases, which were consistent with previous studies (Neria et al., 2008). The possible reason is that patients with infectious disease experience higher level of severity of disaster exposure. Patients often directly suffer from the symptoms and traumatic treatment (such as dyspnea, respiratory failure, alteration of conscious states, and tracheotomy), and after being cured, they were more vulnerable to social discrimination than other groups (Neria et al., 2008).

The pooled prevalence of PTSS in different types of diseases was different, and different mortality rates of those infectious diseases also affect the prevalence of PTSS. Among the healthcare workers, mortality rate of infectious diseases was a significant moderator for heterogeneity, higher mortality rate was associated with a higher prevalence of PTSS. Previous studies have shown that when the mortality rate of infectious diseases is high, the impact on mental health of people may be greater (Spoorthy et al., 2020). Therefore, we think the mortality rate of these infectious diseases should be considered when formulating psychological interventions for people influenced by infectious diseases. In addition, the pooled prevalence of PTSS is relatively high in Europe and the Americas, but relatively low in Asia and Africa. The possible reason is that the epidemic situation is more serious in the first two places (WHO, 2020). In addition, the pooled prevalence of PTSS assessed in different time points was different. PTSS among the general population and the healthcare workers were higher in the immediate aftermath of the infectious disease outbreak (0–6 months), which was in line with other studies (Heron-Delaney et al., 2013; Dai et al., 2016; Righy et al., 2019; Benfante et al., 2020). However, in patients with infectious disease, no significant difference was found, and the prevalence of PTSS among patients was still high even after 6 months. This difference in the prevalence estimates among different population may be explained by the fact that patients are exposed to greater trauma than other population, they need more time to recover (Xiao et al., 2020). Furthermore, we found that the pooled prevalence of PTSS among healthcare workers and the general population identified by screening tools was significantly higher than that identified by diagnostic tools, which was consistent with previous researches (Edmondson et al., 2013). It is reported that studies with poor methodological quality or small sample size generally yielded more extreme prevalence estimates (Mata et al., 2015), the current study showed similar results. However, after controlling for other factors, the results of meta-regression showed that the influence of methodological quality and sample size on the prevalence of PTSS is no longer significant. Hence, the results for quality score and sample size in the subgroup analyses require further clarification.

Implications for the Future

Epidemiological studies have demonstrated a rather high prevalence of mental health problems among different population after an epidemic of infectious disease (Catalan et al., 2011; Tucci et al., 2017). While most of these mental health problems will fade out after the epidemic, symptoms of PTSD may last for a prolonged time and result in severe distress and disability (Vyas et al., 2016). In terms of applicability to COVID-19, evidence suggests that the symptoms of PTSD were very common and persist in patients with infectious disease even higher after 6 months (Hong et al., 2009). Thus, healthcare policies need to take into account both short-term and long-term preventive strategies of PTSD. The information available suggests that the prevalence of PTSS is higher among patients with infectious disease, lower among suspected cases, related workers, and yet even lower in the general population. These three types of samples studied are likely to represent different levels of severity of disaster exposure, with different levels of the PTSS prevalence (Neria et al., 2008). However, there is little doubt that there is a dose–response relationship between the degree of trauma and the mental health burden of disasters (Neria et al., 2008). This relation may not necessarily mean that the principal mental health burden of people exposed to the trauma resulting from infectious disease outbreak is among those who were most directly affected by the disease (Galea and Resnick, 2005). It will be important to establish whether indirect exposure to a trauma during a COVID-19 pandemic was correlated with higher risk of PTSS. In addition, it is necessary to assess the relation between exposure to multiple traumas and risk of PTSS in the future. Additionally, the mortality rate of these infectious diseases should be considered when formulating psychological interventions for people influenced by infectious diseases. Lastly, we think a large multicenter prospective study using a single validated measure of PTSS and measuring possible confounding factors in randomly selected participants is needed in the future, which would provide a more accurate estimate of PTSS among people influenced by infectious diseases.

Limitations

First, although subgroup analyses and meta-regression analyses were conducted to control many moderating factors for the pooled prevalence of PTSS, heterogeneity was still retained in this review. It is reported that heterogeneity is difficult to avoid in meta-analysis of epidemiological surveys (Winsper et al., 2013), suggesting the need for caution when drawing inferences about estimates of PTSS in post-disaster research. In addition, the follow-up time varies greatly among the included longitudinal studies, which hinder comparability. Additionally, although our study included relevant studies across 30 countries, more than half of the eligible studies were from upper-high income countries. Prevalence studies were scarce for many countries, especially for low-income countries. Considering the inconsistency of the healthcare environment and socioeconomic status across the world, more prevalence studies in low-income countries are needed to understand the panorama of PTSS among people influenced by infectious diseases. Lastly, we noticed that most of the included studies were used screening tools to assess PTSS, only 5.71% of studies used diagnostic tools. It is possible that the pooled prevalence of PTSS caused by infectious diseases was overestimated in this review. Thus, we think ongoing surveillance is essential.

Conclusion

Evidence suggests that PTSS were very common among people exposed to the trauma resulting from infectious disease outbreak, and the pooled prevalence among different population ranged from 24.20 to 28.83%. Several factors, including type of disease, mortality rate of disease, region, survey time after outbreak, assessment tool, sample size, and quality score, were associated with PTSS. Mortality rate of disease was a significant moderator for heterogeneity. Further research is needed to identify effective strategies for preventing and treating PTSS among people exposed to the trauma resulting from infectious diseases outbreak.

Publisher's Note

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

References

• 1

  AdesA. E.LuG.HigginsJ. P. (2005). The interpretation of random-effects meta-analysis in decision models. Med. Decis. Making25, 646–654. 10.1177/0272989X05282643

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 2

  AlkhameesA. A.AlrashedS. A.AlzunaydiA. A.AlmohimeedA. S.AljohaniM. S. (2020). The psychological impact of COVID-19 pandemic on the general population of Saudi Arabia. Compr. Psychiatry. 102:152192. 10.1016/j.comppsych.2020.152192

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 3

  AssociationA. P. (2013). Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorder, 5th Edn. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Publishing.

  • Google Scholar

• 4

  BarbatoM.ThomasJ. (2020). Far from the eyes, close to the heart: psychological impact of COVID-19 in a sample of Italian foreign workers. Psychiatry Res. 290:113113. 10.1016/j.psychres.2020.113113

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 5

  BenfanteA.Di TellaM.RomeoA.CastelliL. (2020). Traumatic stress in healthcare workers during COVID-19 pandemic: a review of the immediate impact. Front. Psychol. 11:569935. 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.569935

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 6

  BlekasA.VoitsidisP.AthanasiadouM.ParlapaniE.ChatzigeorgiouA. F.SkoupraM.et al. (2020). COVID-19: PTSD symptoms in Greek health care professionals. Psychol. Trauma. 12, 812–819. 10.1037/tra0000914

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 7

  BoH. X.LiW.YangY.WangY.ZhangQ.CheungT.et al. (2020). Posttraumatic stress symptoms and attitude toward crisis mental health services among clinically stable patients with COVID-19 in China. Psychol. Med. 2020, 1–2. 10.1017/S0033291720000999

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 8

  CaiX.HuX. P.EkumiI. O.WangJ. C.AnY. W.LiZ. W.et al. (2020). Psychological distress and its correlates among COVID-19 survivors during early convalescence across age groups. Am. J. Geriat. Psychiat. 28, 1030–1039. 10.1016/j.jagp.2020.07.003

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 9

  CaiZ.CuiQ.LiuZ.LiJ.GongX.LiuJ.et al. (2020). Nurses endured high risks of psychological problems under the epidemic of COVID-19 in a longitudinal study in Wuhan China. J. Psychiatr. Res. 131, 132–137. 10.1016/j.jpsychires.2020.09.007

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 10

  CailletA.CosteC.SanchezR.AllaouchicheB. (2020). Psychological Impact of COVID-19 on ICU Caregivers. Anaesth. Crit. Care Pain Med. 2020:6. 10.1016/j.accpm.2020.08.006

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 11

  CardelM. I.ManasseS.KrukowskiR. A.RossK.ShakourR.MillerD. R.et al. (2020). COVID-19 impacts mental health outcomes and ability/desire to participate in research among current research participants. Obesity. 2020:23016. 10.1002/oby.23016

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 12

  CastelliL.Di TellaM.BenfanteA.RomeoA. (2020). The spread of COVID-19 in the Italian population: anxiety, depression, and post-traumatic stress symptoms. Can. J. Psychiatry. 65, 731–732. 10.1177/0706743720938598

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 13

  CatalanJ.HardingR.SibleyE.ClucasC.CroomeN.SherrL. (2011). HIV infection and mental health: suicidal behaviour–systematic review. Psychol. Health Med. 16, 588–611. 10.1080/13548506.2011.582125

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 14

  ChanA. O.HuakC. Y. (2004). Psychological impact of the 2003 severe acute respiratory syndrome outbreak on health care workers in a medium size regional general hospital in Singapore. Occup. Med. 54, 190–196. 10.1093/occmed/kqh027

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 15

  ChangM. C.ParkD. (2020). Incidence of post-traumatic stress disorder after coronavirus disease. Healthcare8:40373. 10.3390/healthcare8040373

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 16

  ChenB.LiQ. X.ZhangH.ZhuJ. Y.YangX.WuY. H.et al. (2020). The psychological impact of COVID-19 outbreak on medical staff and the general public. Curr. Psychol. 2020, 1–9. 10.21203/rs.3.rs-21213/v1

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 17

  ChenC. S.WuH. Y.YangP.YenC. F. (2005). Psychological distress of nurses in Taiwan who worked during the outbreak of SARS. Psychiatr. Serv. 56, 76–79. 10.1176/appi.ps.56.1.76

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 18

  ChenM.YueF.LiuG. (2020). Investigation and study on mental status among first line nurses against new type coronavirus pneumonia epidemic under systematic support. J. Mod. Med. Health36, 2671–2674. 10.3969/j.issn.1009-5519.2020.17.005

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 19

  ChewN. W. S.NgiamJ. N.TanB. Y. Q.ThamS. M.TanC. Y. S.JingM. X.et al. (2020). Asian-Pacific perspective on the psychological well-being of healthcare workers during the evolution of the COVID-19 pandemic. Bjpsych Open6:98. 10.1192/bjo.2020.98

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 20

  ChiX. L.BeckerB.YuQ.WilleitP.JiaoC.HuangL. Y.et al. (2020). Prevalence and psychosocial correlates of mental health outcomes among chinese college students during the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic. Front. Psychiatr. 11:803. 10.3389/fpsyt.2020.00803

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 21

  CivantosA. M.BertelliA.GonçalvesA.GetzenE.ChangC.LongQ.et al. (2020b). Mental health among head and neck surgeons in Brazil during the COVID-19 pandemic: a national study. Am. J. Otolaryngol. 41:102694. 10.1016/j.amjoto.2020.102694

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 22

  CivantosA. M.ByrnesY.ChangC. G.PrasadA.ChorathK.PooniaS. K.et al. (2020a). Mental health among otolaryngology resident and attending physicians during the COVID-19 pandemic: national study. Head Neck-J. Sci. Spec. 42, 1597–1609. 10.1002/hed.26292

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 23

  Cortes-AlvarezN. Y.Pineiro-LamasR.Vuelvas-OlmosC. R. (2020). Psychological effects and associated factors of COVID-19 in a Mexican sample. Disast. Med. Publ. 14, 413–424. 10.1017/dmp.2020.215

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 24

  DaiW.ChenL.LaiZ.LiY.WangJ.LiuA. (2016). The incidence of post-traumatic stress disorder among survivors after earthquakes:a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Psychiatr. 16:188. 10.1186/s12888-016-0891-9

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 25

  Di TellaM.RomeoA.BenfanteA.CastelliL. (2020). Mental health of healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic in Italy. J. Eval. Clin. Pract. 26, 1583–1587. 10.1111/jep.13444

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 26

  DobsonH.MalpasC. B.BurrellA. J. C.GurvichC.ChenL.KulkarniJ.et al. (2020). Burnout and psychological distress amongst Australian healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic. Austral. Psychiatr. 2020:1039856220965045. 10.1177/1039856220965045

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 27

  DutheilF.MondillonL.NavelV. (2020). PTSD as the second tsunami of the SARS-Cov-2 pandemic. Psychol. Med. 2020, 1–2. 10.1017/S0033291720001336

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 28

  EdmondsonD.RichardsonS.FausettJ. K.FalzonL.HowardV. J.KronishI. M. (2013). Prevalence of PTSD in survivors of stroke and transient ischemic attack: a meta-analytic review. PLoS ONE8:e66435. 10.1371/journal.pone.0066435

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 29

  El-ZoghbyS. M.SoltanE. M.SalamaH. M. (2020). Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on mental health and social support among adult Egyptians. J. Commun. Health45, 689–695. 10.1007/s10900-020-00853-5

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 30

  FangY.ZheD.ShuranL. (2004). Survey on mental status of subjects recovered from SARS. Chin. Ment. Health J.18, 675–677. 10.3321/j.issn:1000-6729.2004.10.001

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 31

  Fekih-RomdhaneF.GhrissiF.AbbassiB.CherifW.CheourM. (2020). Prevalence and predictors of PTSD during the COVID-19 pandemic: findings from a Tunisian community sample. Psychiatr. Res. 290:113131. 10.1016/j.psychres.2020.113131

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 32

  FiorilloA.GorwoodP. (2020). The consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic on mental health and implications for clinical practice. Eur. Psychiatry63:e32. 10.1192/j.eurpsy.2020.35

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 33

  ForteG.FavieriF.TambelliR.CasagrandeM. (2020). The enemy which sealed the world: effects of COVID-19 diffusion on the psychological state of the Italian Population. J. Clin. Med.9:jcm9061802. 10.3390/jcm9061802

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 34

  GaleaS.ResnickH. (2005). Posttraumatic stress disorder in the general population after mass terrorist incidents: considerations about the nature of exposure. CNS Spectr. 10, 107–115. 10.1017/S1092852900019441

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 35

  GardnerP. J.MoallefP. (2015). Psychological impact on SARS survivors: critical review of the English language literature. Can. Psychol. 56, 123–135. 10.1037/a0037973

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 36

  GiustiE. M.PedroliE.D'AnielloG. E.Stramba BadialeC.PietrabissaG.MannaC.et al. (2020). The psychological impact of the COVID-19 outbreak on health professionals: a cross-sectional study. Front. Psychol. 11:1684. 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01684

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 37

  Gonzalez RamirezL. P.Martinez ArriagaR. J.Hernandez-GonzalezM. A.De la Roca-ChiapasJ. M. (2020). Psychological distress and signs of post-traumatic stress in response to the COVID-19 health emergency in a Mexican sample. Psychol. Res. Behav. Manag. 13, 589–597. 10.2147/PRBM.S259563

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 38

  Gonzalez-SanguinoC.AusinB.CastellanosM. A.SaizJ.Lopez-GomezA.UgidosC.et al. (2020). Mental health consequences during the initial stage of the 2020 Coronavirus pandemic (COVID-19) in Spain. Brain Behav. Immun. 87, 172–176. 10.1016/j.bbi.2020.05.040

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 39

  GreeneT.NeriaY.GrossR. (2016). Prevalence, detection and correlates of PTSD in the primary care setting: a systematic review. J. Clin. Psychol. Med. Sett. 23, 160–180. 10.1007/s10880-016-9449-8

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 40

  GuoJ.FengX. L.WangX. H.van IJzendoornM. H. (2020). Coping with COVID-19: exposure to COVID-19 and negative impact on livelihood predict elevated mental health problems in chinese adults. Int. J. Env. Res. Pub. He. 17:113857. 10.3390/ijerph17113857

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 41

  HaoF.TanW.JiangL.ZhangL.ZhaoX.ZouY.et al. (2020). Do psychiatric patients experience more psychiatric symptoms during COVID-19 pandemic and lockdown? A case-control study with service and research implications for immunopsychiatry. Brain Behav. Immun. 2020:69. 10.1016/j.bbi.2020.04.069

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 42

  HawryluckL.GoldW. L.RobinsonS.PogorskiS.GaleaS.StyraR. (2004). SARS control and psychological effects of quarantine, Toronto, Canada. Emerg. Infect. Dis. 10, 1206–1212. 10.3201/eid1007.030703

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 43

  Heron-DelaneyM.KenardyJ.CharltonE.MatsuokaY. (2013). A systematic review of predictors of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) for adult road traffic crash survivors. Injury44, 1413–1422. 10.1016/j.injury.2013.07.011

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 44

  HigginsJ. P.ThompsonS. G.DeeksJ. J.AltmanD. G. (2003). Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses. BMJ327, 557–560. 10.1136/bmj.327.7414.557

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 45

  HongX.CurrierG. W.ZhaoX.JiangY.ZhouW.WeiJ. (2009). Posttraumatic stress disorder in convalescent severe acute respiratory syndrome patients: a 4-year follow-up study. Gen. Hosp. Psychiatr. 31, 546–554. 10.1016/j.genhosppsych.2009.06.008

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 46

  HongshengG.WuliH.XiaoxiaL.JieW.YilanH.RuL.et al. (2006). A follow-up study of post-traumatic stress disorder of SARS patients after discharge. Chin. J. Rehabil. Med.21, 1003–1004. 10.3969/j.issn.1001-1242.2006.11.018

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 47

  HoulihanC. F.WhitworthJ. A. (2019). Outbreak science: recent progress in the detection and response to outbreaks of infectious diseases. Clin. Med. 19, 140–144. 10.7861/clinmedicine.19-2-140

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 48

  HuangJ. Z.HanM. F.LuoT. D.RenA. K.ZhouX. P. (2020). Mental health survey of medical staff in a tertiary infectious disease hospital for COVID-19. Zhonghua Lao DongWei Sheng Zhi Ye Bing Za Zhi.38, 192–195. 10.3760/cma.j.cn121094-20200219-00063

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 49

  JallohM. F.LiW.BunnellR. E.EthierK. A.O'LearyA.HagemanK. M.et al. (2018). Impact of Ebola experiences and risk perceptions on mental health in Sierra Leone, July 2015. BMJ Glob. Health3:e000471. 10.1136/bmjgh-2017-000471

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 50

  JikeM.ItaniO.WatanabeN.BuysseD. J.KaneitaY. (2018). Long sleep duration and health outcomes: a systematic review, meta-analysis and meta-regression. Sleep Med. Rev. 39, 25–36. 10.1016/j.smrv.2017.06.011

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 51

  JungH.JungS. Y.LeeM. H.KimM. S. (2020). Assessing the presence of post-traumatic stress and turnover intention among nurses post-middle east respiratory syndrome outbreak: the importance of supervisor support. Workplace Health Saf. 2020:2165079919897693. 10.1177/2165079919897693

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 52

  KaratziasT.ShevlinM.MurphyJ.McBrideO.Ben-EzraM.BentallR. P.et al. (2020). Posttraumatic stress symptoms and associated comorbidity during the COVID-19 pandemic in Ireland: a population-based study. J. Trauma Stress2020:22565. 10.1002/jts.22565

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 53

  KiselyS.WarrenN.McMahonL.DalaisC.HenryI.SiskindD. (2020). Occurrence, prevention, and management of the psychological effects of emerging virus outbreaks on healthcare workers: rapid review and meta-analysis. BMJ369:m1642. 10.1136/bmj.m1642

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 54

  KwekS. K.ChewW. M.OngK. C.NgA. W.LeeL. S.KawG.et al. (2006). Quality of life and psychological status in survivors of severe acute respiratory syndrome at 3 months postdischarge. J. Psychosom. Res. 60, 513–519. 10.1016/j.jpsychores.2005.08.020

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 55

  LahavY. (2020). Psychological distress related to COVID-19 - the contribution of continuous traumatic stress. J. Affect Disord. 277, 129–137. 10.1016/j.jad.2020.07.141

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 56

  LaiJ.MaS.WangY.CaiZ.HuJ.WeiN.et al. (2020). Factors associated with mental health outcomes among health care workers exposed to coronavirus disease 2019. J. Am. Med. Assoc. Netw. Open3:e203976. 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.3976

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 57

  LaiqiY.XingquW.YanZ.MingL.GuangxiongL.YongliG.et al. (2007). Mental health status of medical staffs fighting SARS: a long-dated investigation. China J. Health Psychol.15, 567–569. 10.3969/j.issn.1005-1252.2007.06.030

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 58

  LanceeW. J.MaunderR. G.GoldbloomD. S. (2008). Prevalence of psychiatric disorders among toronto hospital workers one to two years after the SARS outbreak. Psychiatr. Servic. 59, 91–95. 10.1176/ps.2008.59.1.91

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 59

  LangeM.JooS.CouetteP. A.de JaegherS.JolyF.HumbertX. (2020). Impact on mental health of the COVID-19 outbreak among community pharmacists during the sanitary lockdown period. Ann. Pharm. Fr. 78, 459–463. 10.1016/j.pharma.2020.09.002

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 60

  LeX. T. T.DangA. K.TowehJ.NguyenQ. N.LeH. T.DoT. T. T.et al. (2020). Evaluating the psychological impacts related to COVID-19 of Vietnamese people under the first nationwide partial lockdown in Vietnam. Front. Psychiatr. 11:824. 10.3389/fpsyt.2020.00824

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 61

  LeeS. M.KangW. S.ChoA.-R.KimT.ParkJ. K. (2018). Psychological impact of the 2015 MERS outbreak on hospital workers and quarantined hemodialysis patients. Comprehens. Psychiatr. 87, 123–127. 10.1016/j.comppsych.2018.10.003

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 62

  LeeT. M.ChiI.ChungL. W.ChouK. L. (2006). Ageing and psychological response during the post-SARS period. Aging Ment. Health10, 303–311. 10.1080/13607860600638545

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 63

  LengF. (2020). Correlation analysis of anxiety, depression and post-traumatic stress disorder among frontline nurses fighting against new coronavirus pneumonia. J. Clin. Nurs.19, 14–17. 10.3969/j.issn.1671-8933.2020.03.005

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 64

  LengM.WeiL. L.ShiX. H.CaoG. R.WeiY. L.XuH.et al. (2020). Mental distress and influencing factors in nurses caring for patients with COVID-19. Nurs. Crit. Care. 2020:12528. 10.1111/nicc.12528

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 65

  LiC.MiY.ChuJ.ZhuL.ZhangZ.LiangL.et al. (2020). Post-traumatic stress disorder of frontline nurses for COVID-19. J. Nurs. Train.35, 615–618. 10.16821/j.cnki.hsjx.2020.25.003

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 66

  LiG.MiaoJ.WangH.XuS.SunW.FanY.et al. (2020). Psychological impact on women health workers involved in COVID-19 outbreak in Wuhan: a cross-sectional study. J. Neurol. Neurosurg. Psychiatr. 91, 895–897. 10.1136/jnnp-2020-323134

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 67

  LiQ. (2020). Psychosocial and coping responses toward 2019 coronavirus diseases (COVID-19): a cross-sectional study within the Chinese general population. QJM113, 731–738. 10.1093/qjmed/hcaa226

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 68

  LiX.LuP. X.HuL. T.HuangT. H.LuL. (2020). Factors associated with mental health results among workers with income losses exposed to COVID-19 in China. Int. J. Env. Res. Pub. He. 17:155627. 10.3390/ijerph17155627

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 69

  LiX. C.ZhouY.XuX. Y. (2020). Factors associated with the psychological well-being among front-line nurses exposed to COVID-2019 in China: a predictive study. J. Nurs. Manag. 2020:13146. 10.1111/jonm.13146

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 70

  LiY.QinQ.SunQ.SanfordL. D.VgontzasA. N.TangX. (2020a). Insomnia and psychological reactions during the COVID-19 outbreak in China. J. Clin. Sleep Med. 16, 1417–1418. 10.5664/jcsm.8524

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 71

  LiY.WangY.JiangJ.ValdimarsdottirU. A.FallK.FangF.et al. (2020b). Psychological distress among health professional students during the COVID-19 outbreak. Psychol. Med. 2020, 1–3. 10.1017/S0033291720001555

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 72

  LiangL.RenH.CaoR.HuY.QinZ.LiC.et al. (2020). The effect of COVID-19 on youth mental health. Psychiatr. Q. 2020:3. 10.1007/s11126-020-09744-3

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 73

  LiangS. W.ChenR. N.LiuL. L.LiX. G.ChenJ. B.TangS. Y.et al. (2020). The psychological impact of the COVID-19 epidemic on Guangdong College students: the difference between seeking and not seeking psychological help. Front. Psychol. 11:2231. 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.02231

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 74

  LijunZ.ShengC.LeiY.QiW.HongzhiY. (2020). A study on post-traumatic stress reaction to the first-line medical staffs against COVID-19. Health Med. Res. Pract.17, 15–18. 10.11986/j.issn.1673-873X.2020.04.004

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 75

  LinC. Y.PengY. C.WuY. H.ChangJ.ChanC. H.YangD. Y. (2007). The psychological effect of severe acute respiratory syndrome on emergency department staff. Emerg. Med. J. 24, 12–17. 10.1136/emj.2006.035089

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 76

  LiuC. H.ZhangE.WongG. T. F.HyunS.HahmH. C. (2020). Factors associated with depression, anxiety, and PTSD symptomatology during the COVID-19 pandemic: clinical implications for U.S. young adult mental health. Psychiatr. Res. 290:113172. 10.1016/j.psychres.2020.113172

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 77

  LiuD.BaumeisterR. F.VeilleuxJ. C.ChenC.LiuW.YueY.et al. (2020). Risk factors associated with mental illness in hospital discharged patients infected with COVID-19 in Wuhan, China. Psychiatr. Res. 292:113297. 10.1016/j.psychres.2020.113297

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 78

  LiuH.PetukhovaM. V.SampsonN. A.Aguilar-GaxiolaS.AlonsoJ.AndradeL. H.et al. (2017). Association of DSM-IV posttraumatic stress disorder with traumatic experience type and history in the world health organization world mental health surveys. J. Am. Med. Assoc. Psychiatr. 74, 270–281. 10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2016.3783

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 79

  LiuN.ZhangF.WeiC.JiaY.ShangZ.SunL.et al. (2020). Prevalence and predictors of PTSS during COVID-19 outbreak in China hardest-hit areas: gender differences matter. Psychiatr. Res. 287:112921. 10.1016/j.psychres.2020.112921

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 80

  LiuX.LinZ.ZhuH.ZhanD.HanT.YaoQ. (2020). Investigation of mental health status of medical stuff from Hainan who aided Hubei province to fight against COVID-19. Johnal Hanan Med. Univ.26, 1285–1228. 10.13210/j.cnki.jhmu.2020622.02

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 81

  LiuY.JiangP.CaoY.ZhouY.LiY. (2020). Investigation on the psychological stress of nursing staff during the novel coronavirus pneumonia epidemic and analysis of related factors. Nurs. Integr. Tradition. Chin. Western Med.6, 179–183. 10.11997/nitcwm.202008042

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 82

  LoneyP. L.ChambersL. W.BennetK. J.RobertsJ. G.StratfordP. W. (1998). Critical appraisal of the health research literature: prevalence or incidence of a health problem. Chronic Dis. Can. 19, 170–176.

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • Google Scholar

• 83

  Luceno-MorenoL.Talavera-VelascoB.Garcia-AlbuerneY.Martin-GarciaJ. (2020). Symptoms of posttraumatic stress, anxiety, depression, levels of resilience and burnout in Spanish Health Personnel during the COVID-19 pandemic. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health17:155514. 10.3390/ijerph17155514

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 84

  LuytC. E.CombesA.BecqueminM. H.Beigelman-AubryC.HatemS.BrunA. L.et al. (2012). Long-term outcomes of pandemic 2009 influenza A(H1N1)-associated severe ARDS. Chest142, 583–592. 10.1378/chest.11-2196

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 85

  MaZ. F.ZhangY. T.LuoX. Q.LiX. L.LiY. S.LiuS. C.et al. (2020). Increased stressful impact among general population in mainland China amid the COVID-19 pandemic: a nationwide cross-sectional study conducted after Wuhan city's travel ban was lifted. Int. J. Soc. Psychiatr. 66, 770–779. 10.1177/0020764020935489

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 86

  MakI. W.ChuC. M.PanP. C.YiuM. G.HoS. C.ChanV. L. (2010). Risk factors for chronic post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) in SARS survivors. Gen. Hosp. Psychiatr. 32, 590–598. 10.1016/j.genhosppsych.2010.07.007

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 87

  MataD. A.RamosM. A.BansalN.KhanR.GuilleC.Di AngelantonioE.et al. (2015). Prevalence of depression and depressive symptoms among resident physicians a systematic review and meta-analysis. J. Am. Med. Assoc. 314, 2373–2383. 10.1001/jama.2015.15845

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 88

  MaunderR. G.LanceeW. J.BaldersonK. E.BennettJ. P.BorgundvaagB.EvansS.et al. (2006). Long-term psychological and occupational effects of providing hospital healthcare during SARS outbreak. Emerg. Infect. Dis. 12, 1924–1932. 10.3201/eid1212.060584

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 89

  MoherD.LiberatiA.TetzlaffJ.AltmanD. G.GroupP. (2009). Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. PLoS Med. 6:e1000097. 10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 90

  MorgansteinJ. C.UrsanoR. J. (2020). Ecological disasters and mental health: causes, consequences, and interventions. Front. Psychiatr. 11:1. 10.3389/fpsyt.2020.00001

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 91

  MorinaN.StamK.PolletT. V.PriebeS. (2018). Prevalence of depression and posttraumatic stress disorder in adult civilian survivors of war who stay in war-afflicted regions. A systematic review and meta-analysis of epidemiological studies. J. Affect. Disord. 239, 328–338. 10.1016/j.jad.2018.07.027

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 92

  NeriaY.NandiA.GaleaS. (2008). Post-traumatic stress disorder following disasters: a systematic review. Psychol. Med. 38, 467–480. 10.1017/S0033291707001353

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 93

  NieA.SuX.ZhangS.GuanW.LiJ. (2020). Psychological impact of COVID-19 outbreak on frontline nurses: a cross-sectional survey study. J. Clin. Nurs. 2020:15454. 10.1111/jocn.15454

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 94

  QiR.ChenW.LiuS.ThompsonP. M.ZhangL. J.XiaF.et al. (2020). Psychological morbidities and fatigue in patients with confirmed COVID-19 during disease outbreak: prevalence and associated biopsychosocial risk factors. medRxiv 2020. 10.1101/2020.05.08.20031666

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 95

  QiuD.YuY.LiR. Q.LiY. L.XiaoS. Y. (2020). Prevalence of sleep disturbances in Chinese healthcare professionals: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Sleep Med. 67, 258–266. 10.1016/j.sleep.2019.01.047

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 96

  ReynoldsD. L.GarayJ. R.DeamondS. L.MoranM. K.GoldW.StyraR. (2008). Understanding, compliance and psychological impact of the SARS quarantine experience. Epidemiol. Infect. 136, 997–1007. 10.1017/S0950268807009156

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 97

  RielloM.PurgatoM.BoveC.MacTaggartD.RusconiE. (2020). Prevalence of post-traumatic symptomatology and anxiety among residential nursing and care home workers following the first COVID-19 outbreak in Northern Italy. Roy Soc. Open Sci. 7:200880. 10.1098/rsos.200880

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 98

  RighyC.RosaR. G.da SilvaR. T. A.KochhannR.MigliavacaC. B.RobinsonC. C.et al. (2019). Prevalence of post-traumatic stress disorder symptoms in adult critical care survivors: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Crit. Care. 23:213. 10.1186/s13054-019-2489-3

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 99

  Rodriguez-ReyR.Garrido-HernansaizH.ColladoS. (2020). Psychological impact and associated factors during the initial stage of the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic among the general population in Spain. Front. Psychol. 11:1540. 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01540

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 100

  RogersJ. P.ChesneyE.OliverD.PollakT. A.McGuireP.Fusar-PoliP.et al. (2020). Psychiatric and neuropsychiatric presentations associated with severe coronavirus infections: a systematic review and meta-analysis with comparison to the COVID-19 pandemic. Lancet Psychiatr. 7, 611–627. 10.1016/S2215-0366(20)30203-0

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 101

  RossiR.SocciV.PacittiF.Di LorenzoG.Di MarcoA.SiracusanoA.et al. (2020a). Mental health outcomes among frontline and second-line health care workers during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic in Italy. J. Am. Med. Assoc. Netw. Open3:10185. 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.10185

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 102

  RossiR.SocciV.TaleviD.MensiS.NioluC.PacittiF.et al. (2020b). COVID-19 pandemic and lockdown measures impact on mental health among the general population in Italy. Front. Psychiatr. 11:790. 10.3389/fpsyt.2020.00790

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 103

  SandersonS.TattI. D.HigginsJ. P. (2007). Tools for assessing quality and susceptibility to bias in observational studies in epidemiology: a systematic review and annotated bibliography. Int. J. Epidemiol. 36, 666–676. 10.1093/ije/dym018

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 104

  SeyahiE.PoyrazB. C.SutN.AkdoganS.HamuryudanV. (2020). The psychological state and changes in the routine of the patients with rheumatic diseases during the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) outbreak in Turkey: a web-based cross-sectional survey. Rheumatol. Int. 40, 1229–1238. 10.1007/s00296-020-04626-0

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 105

  ShermanA. C.WilliamsM. L.AmickB. C.HudsonT. J.MessiasE. L. (2020). Mental health outcomes associated with the COVID-19 pandemic: prevalence and risk factors in a southern US state. Psychiatr. Res. 293:113476. 10.1016/j.psychres.2020.113476

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 106

  SiM. Y.SuX. Y.JiangY.WangW. J.GuX. F.MaL.et al. (2020). Psychological impact of COVID-19 on medical care workers in China. Infect. Dis. Poverty9:113. 10.1186/s40249-020-00724-0

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 107

  SimK.Huak ChanY.ChongP. N.ChuaH. C.Wen SoonS. (2010). Psychosocial and coping responses within the community health care setting towards a national outbreak of an infectious disease. J. Psychosom. Res. 68, 195–202. 10.1016/j.jpsychores.2009.04.004

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 108

  SinS. S.HuakC. Y. (2004). Psychological impact of the SARS outbreak on a Singaporean rehabilitation department. Int. J. Therapy Rehabil. 11, 417–424. 10.12968/ijtr.2004.11.9.19589

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 109

  SongX.FuW.LiuX.LuoZ.WangR.ZhouN.et al. (2020). Mental health status of medical staff in emergency departments during the Coronavirus disease 2019 epidemic in China. Brain Behav. Immun. 88, 60–65. 10.1016/j.bbi.2020.06.002

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 110

  SpoorthyM. S.PratapaS. K.MahantS. (2020). Mental health problems faced by healthcare workers due to the COVID-19 pandemic-a review. Asian J. Psychiatr. 51:102119. 10.1016/j.ajp.2020.102119

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 111

  SteeleL.OrefuwaE.DickmannP. (2016). Drivers of earlier infectious disease outbreak detection: a systematic literature review. Int. J. Infect. Dis. 53, 15–20. 10.1016/j.ijid.2016.10.005

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 112

  StroupD. F.BerlinJ. A.MortonS. C.OlkinI.WilliamsonG. D.RennieD.et al. (2000). Meta-analysis of observational studies in epidemiology: a proposal for reporting. Meta-analysis Of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) group. J. Am. Med. Assoc. 283, 2008–2012. 10.1001/jama.283.15.2008

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 113

  SuT. P.LienT. C.YangC. Y.SuY. L.WangJ. H.TsaiS. L.et al. (2007). Prevalence of psychiatric morbidity and psychological adaptation of the nurses in a structured SARS caring unit during outbreak: a prospective and periodic assessment study in Taiwan. J. Psychiatr. Res. 41, 119–130. 10.1016/j.jpsychires.2005.12.006

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 114

  TanW.HaoF.McIntyreR. S.JiangL.JiangX.ZhangL.et al. (2020). Is returning to work during the COVID-19 pandemic stressful? A study on immediate mental health status and psychoneuroimmunity prevention measures of Chinese workforce. Brain Behav. Immun. 87, 84–92. 10.1016/j.bbi.2020.04.055

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 115

  TangL.PanL.YuanL.ZhaL. (2017). Prevalence and related factors of post-traumatic stress disorder among medical staff members exposed to H7N9 patients. Int. J. Nurs. Sci. 4, 63–67. 10.1016/j.ijnss.2016.12.002

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 116

  TangW.HuT.HuB.JinC.WangG.XieC.et al. (2020). Prevalence and correlates of PTSD and depressive symptoms one month after the outbreak of the COVID-19 epidemic in a sample of home-quarantined Chinese university students. J. Affect. Disord. 2020:9. 10.1016/j.jad.2020.05.009

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 117

  TeeM. L.TeeC. A.AnlacanJ. P.AligamK. J. G.ReyesP. W. C.KuruchitthamV.et al. (2020). Psychological impact of COVID-19 pandemic in the Philippines. J. Affect Disord. 277, 379–391. 10.1016/j.jad.2020.08.043

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 118

  Tie-yingS.ChaojiaJ. Shu-hua L Qi-guiJ. Z.Xiang-yuQ. (2005). Post-traumatic stress disorder and related factors following the severe acute respiratory syndrome. Chin. J. Clin. Rehabil.9, 9–13. 10.3321/j.issn:1673-8225.2005.44.012

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 119

  TraunmullerC.StefitzR.GaisbachgrabnerK.SchwerdtfegerA. (2020). Psychological correlates of COVID-19 pandemic in the Austrian population. BMC Public Health20:1395. 10.1186/s12889-020-09489-5

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 120

  TucciV.MoukaddamN.MeadowsJ.ShahS.GalwankarS. C.KapurG. B. (2017). The forgotten plague: psychiatric manifestations of ebola, zika, and emerging infectious diseases. J. Glob. Infect. Dis. 9, 151–156. 10.4103/jgid.jgid_66_17

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 121

  VarshneyM.ParelJ. T.RaizadaN.SarinS. K. (2020). Initial psychological impact of COVID-19 and its correlates in Indian Community: an online (FEEL-COVID) survey. PLoS ONE15:e0233874. 10.1371/journal.pone.0233874

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 122

  VyasK. J.DelaneyE. M.Webb-MurphyJ. A.JohnstonS. L. (2016). Psychological impact of deploying in support of the U.S. Response to ebola: a systematic review and meta-analysis of past outbreaks. Mil. Med. 181, e1515–e1531. 10.7205/MILMED-D-15-00473

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 123

  WangC.PanR.WanX.TanY.XuL.McIntyreR. S.et al. (2020). A longitudinal study on the mental health of general population during the COVID-19 epidemic in China. Brain Behav. Immun. 2020:28. 10.1016/j.bbi.2020.04.028

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 124

  WangZ.WuX.DaiW.KamingaA. C.WuX.PanX.et al. (2019). The prevalence of posttraumatic stress disorder among survivors after a typhoon or hurricane: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Disast. Med. Public Health Prep. 13, 1065–1073. 10.1017/dmp.2019.26

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 125

  WesemannU.HadjamuN.WillmundG.DolffS.VonderlinN.WakiliR.et al. (2020). Influence of COVID-19 on general stress and posttraumatic stress symptoms among hospitalized high-risk patients. Psychol. Med. 2020, 1–2. 10.1017/S0033291720003165

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 126

  WHO. (2020). Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) Weekly Epidemiological Update and Weekly Operational Update 2020. Available online at: https://www.who.int/emergencies/diseases/novel-coronavirus-2019/situation-reports/ (accessed December 10, 2020).

  • Google Scholar

• 127

  WinsperC.GanapathyR.MarwahaS.LargeM.BirchwoodM.SinghS. P. (2013). A systematic review and meta-regression analysis of aggression during the first episode of psychosis. Acta Psychiatr. Scand. 128, 413–421. 10.1111/acps.12113

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 128

  WuK. K.ChanS. K.MaT. M. (2005). Posttraumatic stress, anxiety, and depression in survivors of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS). J. Traumat. Stress18, 39–42. 10.1002/jts.20004

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 129

  WuP.FangY.GuanZ.FanB.KongJ.YaoZ.et al. (2009). The psychological impact of the SARS epidemic on hospital employees in China: exposure, risk perception, and altruistic acceptance of risk. Can. J. Psychiatr. 54, 302–311. 10.1177/070674370905400504

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 130

  XiaoS. Y.LuoD.XiaoY. (2020). Survivors of COVID-19 are at high risk of posttraumatic stress disorder. Glob. Health Res. Pol. 5:2. 10.1186/s41256-020-00155-2

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 131

  XieR.ZhuX.HuangX. (2020). Anxiety state of ordinary residents under novel coronavirus pneumonia epidemic situation and related factors of emergency level. China J. Health Psychol.28, 1670–1674. 10.13342/j.cnki.cjhp.2020.11.014

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 132

  XuJ.ZhengY.WangM.ZhaoJ.ZhanQ.FuM.et al. (2011). Predictors of symptoms of posttraumatic stress in Chinese university students during the 2009 H1N1 influenza pandemic. Med. Sci. Monit. 17, PH60–PH64. 10.12659/MSM.881836

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 133

  YinQ.SunZ.LiuT.NiX.DengX.JiaY.et al. (2020). Posttraumatic stress symptoms of health care workers during the corona virus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Clin. Psychol. Psychother. 2020:2477. 10.1002/cpp.2477

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 134

  YongX.Ke-rangZ.HongY. (2005). Difference of posttraumatic stress disorder between severe acute respiratory syndrome patients and the public in epidemic area. Chin. J. Clin. Rehabil.9, 214–215. 10.3321/j.issn:1673-8225.2005.16.020

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 135

  YuanB.CaiX.WangJ.HuX.LiZ.LuT.et al. (2020). Investigation of psychological stress state of during early convalescence of patients with coronavirus disease 2019 and analysis of its influencing factors. Chin. J. Clin. Neurosurg.25, 531–534. 10.13798/j.issn.1009-153X.2020.08.011

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 136

  ZhangC.YeM.FuY.YangM.LuoF.YuanJ.et al. (2020). The psychological impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on teenagers in China. J. Adolesc. Health67, 747–755. 10.1016/j.jadohealth.2020.08.026

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 137

  ZhangY.LiuX.XueM.LuoL.HeG.FengP.et al. (2020). The correlation between post-traumatic stress disorder and perceived stress in suspected COVID-19 patients quarantined in hospital. Chin. J. Respir. Crit. Care Med.19, 325-329. 10.7507/1671-6205.202005021

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 138

  ZhangY. F.MaZ. F. (2020a). Psychological responses and lifestyle changes among pregnant women with respect to the early stages of COVID-19 pandemic. Int. J. Soc. Psychiatr. 67, 344–350. 10.1177/0020764020952116

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 139

  ZhangY. F.MaZ. F. (2020b). Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on mental health and quality of life among local residents in Liaoning Province, China: a cross-sectional study. Int. J. Env. Res. Pub. He. 17:72381. 10.3390/ijerph17072381

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 140

  ZhaoY. Q.AnY. Y.TanX.LiX. H. (2020). Mental health and its influencing factors among self-isolating ordinary citizens during the beginning epidemic of COVID-19. J. Loss Trauma25, 580–593. 10.1080/15325024.2020.1761592

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 141

  ZhongguoL.ZuxunL.YongX.KerangZ. (2006). Investigation on posttraumatic stress reactions in SARS patients. J. Shanxi Med. Univ.37, 56–58. 10.3969/j.issn.1007-6611.2006.01.019

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 142

  ZhouY.ShiH.LiuZ.PengS.WangR.QiL.et al. (2020). The prevalence of psychiatric symptoms of pregnant and non-pregnant women during the COVID-19 epidemic. Transl. Psychiatr. 10:319. 10.1038/s41398-020-01006-x

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar