Skip to main content
Full access
Brief Reports
Published Online: 3 February 2021

Mental Health and Psychosocial Characteristics Associated With COVID-19 Among U.S. Adults

Abstract

Objective:

This study examined psychosocial and mental health characteristics associated with COVID-19 infection.

Methods:

An online survey that asked about COVID-19 status, social support, and mental health was used to recruit a national sample of 6,607 low- and middle-income adults; 354 reported a positive COVID-19 test, 1,819 reported a negative test, and 4,434 reported not being tested in May or June 2020.

Results:

Psychiatric history and current social support and mental health were not statistically significantly associated with testing positive for COVID-19 after analyses controlled for other characteristics. In order of magnitude, having any friends or family who had COVID-19, being a veteran, having a greater number of close friends or relatives, having any history of homelessness, having an advanced degree, or being a student was significantly associated with testing positive for COVID-19.

Conclusions:

Clinical risk for COVID-19 infection and the medical needs of veterans and of unstably housed populations should be considered.

HIGHLIGHTS

Having many close friends and relatives, particularly those testing positive for COVID-19, was associated with increased risk for testing positive for COVID-19 infection.
Psychosocial characteristics, such as a history of military service or homelessness, were also associated with an increased risk for a positive COVID-19 test.
No mental health conditions were strongly associated with testing positive for COVID-19.
The COVID-19 pandemic has profoundly affected health care systems, the economy, and the health and well-being of people around the world. The potential effects of COVID-19 on mental health have raised grave concerns. For example, some observers have described public panic, depression, anxiety, and posttraumatic stress arising from concerns about infection, illness, and death (1). Others have pointed to the disruptive effects of social distancing on basic human needs for human connection, which may exacerbate underlying individual vulnerabilities for mental illness (2).
Historically, pandemics and disasters have disproportionately affected poor and vulnerable populations, including homeless individuals and those with severe mental illness (3). This may partly be due to disparities in economic resources, access to preventive health care, and psychosocial determinants of health (4). Through neurobiological pathways, poor mental health may weaken immune systems and increase the risk for developing infectious diseases (5). Thus, COVID-19 may negatively affect mental well-being, but, conversely, poor mental and psychosocial functioning may also increase the risk for COVID-19 infection.
We recruited a large national sample of middle- and low-income U.S. adults who reported that they had tested positive for COVID-19 (COVID-19+), had tested negative (COVID-19−), or had not been tested to understand the sociodemographic, psychosocial, and mental health factors that may put adults at risk for COVID-19 infection. We hypothesized that poor mental and psychosocial functioning would be associated with testing positive for COVID-19.

Methods

A national sample of 6,607 U.S. adults was recruited in May and June 2020 to examine health and social well-being during the COVID-19 pandemic. Eligible for the study were adults who were at least 22 years old, lived in the United States, and reported an annual personal gross income of ≤$75,000. Participants were recruited through Amazon Mechanical Turk (MTurk), which is an online labor market with >500,000 participants across 200 countries and has become a popular site for conducting surveys and online interventions. To ensure data quality, we invited only participants who had completed ≥50 approved Human Intelligence Tasks (HITs) and had a HIT approval rating of ≥50%. Results from cross-sample investigations have indicated that data obtained from MTurk have the same level of quality as or higher than data collected from traditional subject pools such as community samples, college students, and professional panels (6).
In total, 9,760 individuals agreed to participate in the study, of whom 6,762 (69.3%) met the eligibility criteria; 155 workers were removed because they failed a validity check (i.e., they failed on three items from the validity scales of the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory–2). The final study sample consisted of 6,607 participants (67.7% of the initial recruitment sample) from all 50 U.S. states and the District of Columbia. Using data from the 2018 American Community Survey for comparison, we found that the sample was comparable to the general U.S. population with respect to key demographic characteristics, including sex, race, ethnicity, and geographic region; the exception was age, with our sample being younger (mean age=37.9 years vs. general population age=49.5). (A table showing demographic data is available as an online supplement to this report.) All participants provided informed consent and were compensated for their participation through MTurk; study procedures were approved by the institutional review board at the University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston.
Sociodemographic information was based on self-reports. Veteran status was defined as “ever served on active duty in the U.S. military,” and history of homelessness was defined as “did not have a stable nighttime residence (such as staying on streets, in shelters, cars, etc.).” COVID-19 status was assessed by asking participants whether they had been tested for COVID-19 and if so, what the outcome was (i.e., positive or negative test result). They were also asked whether anyone close to them (e.g., friends or family) had tested positive for COVID-19.
Social connectedness was assessed with the Medical Outcomes Study Social Support Survey–Short Form (7), the short-form University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), Loneliness Scale (8), and a question about the number of close friends and relatives that participants had. Health status was assessed by asking participants whether they had ever been diagnosed as having any of 22 different health conditions (e.g., cancer, heart disease, or arthritis) and summing the total number reported (9).
Psychiatric history was assessed by asking participants whether they had ever been diagnosed as having any of nine mental health conditions or substance use disorders. Current mental health and substance use were assessed with validated measures, including the Patient Health Questionnaire–4 (PHQ-4) (10), assessment of any past 2-week suicidal ideation, and the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (11). Participants were also asked whether they currently smoked cigarettes, vaped, or were issued any illicit drugs during the past month.
Participants were divided into three groups—COVID-19+, COVID-19−, and not tested for COVID-19—whose sociodemographic, psychosocial, and clinical characteristics were compared in bivariate analyses using analysis of variance and chi-square tests. Post hoc pairwise tests were conducted with Tukey’s honestly significant difference test and chi-squared tests. A series of multinomial logistic regressions were conducted to examine sociodemographic, psychosocial, and clinical characteristics associated with COVID-19+ status, with separate regressions for past psychiatric diagnoses and for measures of current mental health and social support.

Results

In the total study sample (N=6,607), 5.4% (N=354) were COVID-19+, 27.5% (N=1,819) were COVID-19−, and 67.1% (N=4,434) had not been tested for COVID-19. Bivariate comparisons between groups revealed statistically significant group differences in nearly every sociodemographic category assessed (see online supplement to this report). Compared with the COVID-19− and untested groups, the COVID-19+ group was more likely to consist of veterans and have individuals with a history of homelessness or who reported a greater number of close friends or relatives, greater social support, and a greater sense of loneliness.
The COVID-19+ group also reported a significantly greater number of chronic medical conditions and was more likely to report having been given diagnoses of a range of psychiatric disorders, including schizophrenia-spectrum disorders, posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), bipolar disorder, anxiety disorder, major depression, and alcohol and drug use disorders as well as traumatic brain injury. The COVID-19+ group was also more likely to screen positive for current major depression, generalized anxiety disorder, and recent suicidal ideation and was also more likely to report recent use of illicit drugs, cigarettes, or vaping devices.
Multivariate analyses were conducted to examine sociodemographic, psychosocial, and health characteristics independently associated with being in the COVID-19+ group. As shown in Table 1, a multinomial logistic regression found, in order of magnitude, that having any friends or family who were COVID-19+, being a veteran, having several close friends or relatives, having any history of homelessness, having an advanced degree, being a student, and being younger were each statistically significantly associated with COVID-19+ status. None of the psychiatric diagnoses were statistically significantly associated with COVID-19+ status (see online supplement for full table). When the regression was repeated with a veteran × history of homelessness interaction term, the interaction effect was not statistically significant (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]=0.68, 95% confidence interval [CI]=0.32–1.44), indicating that veteran status and homelessness history each independently increased risk for COVID-19+ status. When the regression was conducted without veteran status or history of homelessness in the model, among the psychiatric diagnoses only PTSD emerged as being significantly associated with COVID-19+ status (aOR=1.57, 95% CI= 1.07–2.31).
TABLE 1. Associations of sociodemographic characteristics, psychosocial status, and psychiatric diagnoses with COVID-19 infectiona
 COVID-19 status
CharacteristicPositive (N=354)Untested (N=4,434)
Age.97–1.00*.99–1.00
Male.93–1.73.78–1.01*
Race-ethnicity (reference: White)  
 Black.52–1.06.51–.72***
 Asian.44–1.62.84–1.35
 Other.30–1.32.48–.89**
 Hispanic.77–1.49.69–.97**
Education (reference: some college or less)  
 Associate or bachelor’s degree.83–2.02.94–1.25
 Advanced degree1.12–2.85*.93–1.34
 Student status1.20–2.26**.74–.99**
Marital status (reference: single)  
 Divorced, separated, or widowed.51–2.66.80–1.32
 Married or living with partner.86–2.05.74–.99**
No. of minors in household.88–1.22.84–.96**
Work status (reference: half-time or full-time)  
 Self-employed.38–2.181.07–1.69**
 Not working.69–2.421.36–1.92***
State of residence (reference: northeast)  
 Midwest.47–1.271.06–1.56*
 South.65–1.45.90–1.25
 West.46–1.06.83–1.19
Veteran status1.45–3.12***.94–1.47
Any history of homelessness1.27–2.84**.73–1.04
Any friends or family COVID-19+5.86–11.71***.98–1.32
No. of close friends/relatives1.55–2.91***.49–.61***
Schizophrenia spectrum disorder.66–1.671.03–2.17*
Alcohol use disorder.64–1.24.42–.62***
a
Except where indicated otherwise, the reference group was the COVID-19–negative group (N=1,819). Values shown are 95% confidence intervals for odds ratios. COVID-19+, COVID-19 positive.
*
p<0.05, **p<0.01, ***p<0.001.
A second multinomial regression model was conducted, replacing psychiatric diagnoses with current measures of mental health and social support. The results were similar to the ones reported above; no measure of current social support and mental health was statistically significant, although both veteran status and history of homelessness remained significant (see online supplement). A veteran × history of homelessness interaction effect was not significant (aOR=0.69, 95% CI=0.32–1.46). When veteran status and history of homelessness were excluded, scores on the UCLA Loneliness Scale (aOR=1.12, 95% CI=1.00–1.25), any illicit drug use in the past month (aOR=1.55, 95% CI=1.03–2.32), and current vaping (aOR=1.73, 95% CI=1.17–2.58) were each significantly associated with COVID-19+ status.

Discussion

This national study of middle- and low-income adults during the COVID-19 pandemic confirmed some factors known to be associated with testing positive for COVID-19 infection. It is important to state some caveats of this study up front. COVID-19 has not spread uniformly across the United States and has varied geographically (12), which we tried to account for but without geographic specificity. Moreover, the study sample did not have equal access to COVID-19 testing, and most participants had not been tested. We focused on examining those who had been tested, so the study results need to be interpreted within the context of these important study limitations.
We found that those with close friends and family who had COVID-19 and those who had more close friends or family in general were at greater increased risk for COVID-19 infection. Being a part- or full-time student also increased the risk for testing positive for COVID-19, possibly because of greater exposure to others. These findings support the practice of social distancing and wearing personal protective equipment when interacting with others to reduce COVID-19 transmission. However, in terms of COVID-19–associated mental health and psychosocial factors, our hypothesis was only partially confirmed. Mental health factors did not emerge as significant risk factors for COVID-19 per se. However, adults who had served in the military or had histories of homelessness were significantly more likely to test positive for COVID-19, and both veteran and homeless populations are known to have higher rates of mental illness and poor social functioning (13, 14). Controlling for sociodemographic and other psychosocial factors, we found that veterans were more than twice as likely to test positive for COVID-19 than were nonveterans. Moreover, adults with any history of homelessness were nearly twice as likely to test positive for COVID-19 than were domiciled adults.
Veterans and adults with histories of homelessness are distinct populations that were found to have an increased risk for COVID-19. A possible common thread between these two populations with respect to COVID-19 may be that both veterans and those with histories of homelessness are likely to have lived in congregate settings, such as military bases or homeless shelters and transitional housing settings. However, we did not collect data on time since serving in the military or last episode of homelessness, but both of these populations may be more likely to congregate or interact socially because of shared identities and needs compared with those in the general population. Alternatively, they may share no common thread, and each population may have separate reasons for being at higher risk for COVID-19 than others. For example, veterans may be at increased risk because of vulnerabilities related to military service and combat, and those who are unstably housed may have increased COVID-19 exposure. However, we can only speculate on the reasons; it may also be that these characteristics are proxies for other factors more closely associated with COVID-19 risk. Certainly, these two populations deserve further study, and service models that encourage independent housing should be encouraged (15); special attention to the medical needs and clinical risk for COVID-19 among individuals in these populations may also be needed.
There were several important additional study limitations. This was a cross-sectional survey, so we could not infer the directionalities or causalities of the associations identified. COVID-19 test results were based on self-reports and were not confirmed by lab tests. Importantly, assessments have revealed variable validity of different COVID-19 tests, whose possible differences we were not equipped to examine. We also did not ask participants about any COVID-19 symptoms, and there is increasing evidence that many individuals who test positive for COVID-19 are asymptomatic and may have different transmission profiles and risks (16). Although we recruited a heterogenous sample from all four major geographic regions of the United States, no stratified sampling was used, and the sample may not be nationally representative, particularly of those at risk for homelessness who may be less likely to have online access. Prevalence and epidemiological values derived from the data should be interpreted with caution because they are likely not representative; however, the findings on associations between the different variables studied can be interpreted with greater confidence. These limitations notwithstanding, the study had several strengths, including the large national sample, the assessment of various psychosocial and mental health variables not readily available in medical records, and findings that may contribute to ongoing efforts to address the COVID-19 pandemic.

Conclusions

Having close personal contacts, being a veteran, and having a history of homelessness were three major factors associated with contracting COVID-19. These findings reinforce the importance of social distancing and highlight several population subgroups that may be at increased risk for contracting the virus.

Supplementary Material

File (appi.ps.202000540.ds001.pdf)

References

1.
Bao Y, Sun Y, Meng S, et al: 2019-nCoV epidemic: address mental health care to empower society. Lancet 2020; 395:e37–e38
2.
Hagerty SL, Williams LM: The impact of COVID-19 on mental health: the interactive roles of brain biotypes and human connection. Brain Behav Immun Health (Epub May 7, 2020). doi:
3.
Tsai J, Wilson M: COVID-19: a potential public health problem for homeless populations. Lancet Public Health 2020; 5:e186–e187
4.
Nicogossian A, Kloiber O, Zimmerman T, et al: Poverty, disparities, disasters and global burden of disease. World Med Health Policy 2012; 4:1–4
5.
Blume J, Douglas SD, Evans DL: Immune suppression and immune activation in depression. Brain Behav Immun 2011; 25:221–229
6.
Kees J, Berry C, Burton S, et al: An analysis of data quality: professional panels, student subject pools, and Amazon’s Mechanical Turk. J Advert 2017; 46:141–155
7.
Holden L, Lee C, Hockey R, et al: Validation of the MOS Social Support Survey 6-item (MOS-SSS-6) measure with two large population-based samples of Australian women. Qual Life Res 2014; 23:2849–2853
8.
Russell D, Peplau LA, Cutrona CE: The revised UCLA Loneliness Scale: concurrent and discriminant validity evidence. J Pers Soc Psychol 1980; 39:472–480
9.
Thomas MM, Harpaz-Rotem I, Tsai J, et al: Mental and physical health conditions in US combat veterans: results from the National Health and Resilience in Veterans Study. Prim Care Companion CNS Disord 2017; 19:17m02118
10.
Kroenke K, Spitzer RL, Williams JBW: The PHQ-9: validity of a brief depression severity measure. J Gen Intern Med 2001; 16:606–613
11.
Bush K, Kivlahan DR, McDonell MB, et al: The AUDIT alcohol consumption questions (AUDIT-C): an effective brief screening test for problem drinking. Ambulatory Care Quality Improvement Project (ACQUIP). Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test. Arch Intern Med 1998; 158:1789–1795
12.
Mollalo A, Vahedi B, Rivera KM: GIS-based spatial modeling of COVID-19 incidence rate in the continental United States. Sci Total Environ 2020; 728:138884
13.
Tsai J, Harpaz-Rotem I, Pietrzak RH, et al: The role of coping, resilience, and social support in mediating the relation between PTSD and social functioning in veterans returning from Iraq and Afghanistan. Psychiatry 2012; 75:135–149
14.
Hoge CW, Auchterlonie JL, Milliken CS: Mental health problems, use of mental health services, and attrition from military service after returning from deployment to Iraq or Afghanistan. JAMA 2006; 295:1023–1032
15.
Tsai J: Timing and momentum in VA’s path toward Housing First. Psychiatr Serv 2014; 65:836
16.
Gandhi M, Yokoe DS, Havlir DV: Asymptomatic transmission, the Achilles’ heel of current strategies to control COVID-19. N Engl J Med 2020; 382:2158–2160

Information & Authors

Information

Published In

Go to Psychiatric Services
Go to Psychiatric Services
Psychiatric Services
Pages: 444 - 447
PubMed: 33530731

History

Received: 16 July 2020
Revision received: 12 August 2020
Revision received: 19 August 2020
Accepted: 19 August 2020
Published online: 3 February 2021
Published in print: April 01, 2021

Keywords

  1. COVID-19 pandemic
  2. Veteran
  3. Homelessness
  4. Mental health

Authors

Details

Jack Tsai, Ph.D. [email protected]
School of Public Health, University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston (Tsai); National Center on Homelessness Among Veterans, U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, Tampa, Florida (Tsai, Elbogen); Department of Psychology, University of Hartford, West Hartford, Connecticut (Huang); Department of Psychiatry, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, North Carolina (Elbogen).
Minda Huang, M.S.
School of Public Health, University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston (Tsai); National Center on Homelessness Among Veterans, U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, Tampa, Florida (Tsai, Elbogen); Department of Psychology, University of Hartford, West Hartford, Connecticut (Huang); Department of Psychiatry, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, North Carolina (Elbogen).
Eric Elbogen, Ph.D.
School of Public Health, University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston (Tsai); National Center on Homelessness Among Veterans, U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, Tampa, Florida (Tsai, Elbogen); Department of Psychology, University of Hartford, West Hartford, Connecticut (Huang); Department of Psychiatry, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, North Carolina (Elbogen).

Notes

Send correspondence to Dr. Tsai ([email protected]).

Competing Interests

The authors report no financial relationships with commercial interests.

Funding Information

This study was supported by internal funds from the University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston.

Metrics & Citations

Metrics

Citations

Export Citations

If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.

For more information or tips please see 'Downloading to a citation manager' in the Help menu.

Format
Citation style
Style
Copy to clipboard

View Options

View options

PDF/EPUB

View PDF/EPUB

Login options

Already a subscriber? Access your subscription through your login credentials or your institution for full access to this article.

Personal login Institutional Login Open Athens login

Not a subscriber?

Subscribe Now / Learn More

PsychiatryOnline subscription options offer access to the DSM-5-TR® library, books, journals, CME, and patient resources. This all-in-one virtual library provides psychiatrists and mental health professionals with key resources for diagnosis, treatment, research, and professional development.

Need more help? PsychiatryOnline Customer Service may be reached by emailing [email protected] or by calling 800-368-5777 (in the U.S.) or 703-907-7322 (outside the U.S.).

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

Share

Share

Share article link

Share