Cited by 381COVID-19 and Mental HealthLong-Term Effects of COVID-19Maternal Mental Health During Pregnancy and Postpartum

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 72 of the 79 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; none of the 48 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.

Long-term effects of COVID-19 on mental health: A systematic review

Open access

Abstract

Background Acute effects of COVID-19 can be life-threatening. Alterations in mental health during the active infection have been documented, but the long-term consequences are less clear. Method A systematic review was undertaken to investigate the effect of COVID-19 infection on long-term mental health outcomes. Three databases [PubMed, Medline (Ovid) and Cochrane library] were searched between 1st October 2019 and 29th August 2021 with additional hand searching to identify all published studies reporting symptoms of generalised anxiety, depression, post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), or sleep disturbance in participants at least one month after COVID-19 infection. The prevalence and mean symptom score of each were assessed. Results Eight hundred and eighty five studies were found, of which 33 were included in the review involving a total of 6743 participants. The studies’ risk of bias were typically fair quality. The median study age of participants was 57.8 years (IQR 49.3–60.7), with 63.0% male (IQR 57.0%–73.0%). Participants typically experienced no or mild symptoms of long-term anxiety (GAD-7, STAI-S, HADS) and depression (PHQ-9, BDI, PHQ-2, HADS). Prevalence varied depending on the measurement tool. Sleep disturbances (primarily insomnia) were most commonly reported as mild. PTSD prevalence was similar to anxiety and depression. Conclusion The overall effect of the pandemic has been linked with worsening psychiatric symptoms. However, the long-term effect from direct COVID-19 infection has been associated with no or mild symptoms. Studies exhibited the long-term prevalence of anxiety, depression, PTSD, and sleep disturbances to be comparable to general population levels.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jad.2021.11.031

Cites

72 of 72 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

0 of 48 cited sources checked · 0 supported · 0 flagged

Show all 75 claims

  • It may state two separate claims as one. 17
  • Probably not a substantial claim. 12
24 of 24
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The findings from adult hospital or treatment-centre samples can be generalised to COVID-19 survivors outside those settings.

    “All studies examined an adult sample from treatment centres or hospitals.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Mental health symptoms measured at follow-up are attributable to direct COVID-19 infection rather than to indirect pandemic effects.

    “However, the long-term effect from direct COVID-19 infection has been associated with no or mild symptoms.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    General-population mental health levels during the pandemic provide a valid benchmark for long-term mental health after COVID-19 infection.

    “Studies exhibited the long-term prevalence of anxiety, depression, PTSD, and sleep disturbances to be comparable to general population levels.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The COVID-19 pandemic overall has been associated with worsening psychiatric symptoms.

    “The overall effect of the pandemic has been linked with worsening psychiatric symptoms.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The PCL-5, TSQ, DTS, and IES-R instruments provide comparable measures of PTSD.

    “As for PTSD, overall PCL-5 and TSQ scores were lower compared to DTS and IES-R scores.”
5 of 5

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.

  • PTSD follow-up trend reverses between results and discussion

    Major

    The results report higher PTSD prevalence after more than three months than before three months. The discussion instead says the sensitivity analysis found a decrease with longer follow-up.

  • Anxiety instrument counts total 14 studies, not 15

    Minor

    The listed instrument groups contain five GAD-7 studies, one STAI-S study, seven HADS studies and one clinical-interview study. These add to 14, rather than the stated 15.

    Reported 15 · recomputed 14

  • Mendez's PTSD score is assigned to conflicting instruments

    Minor

    Mendez is listed among studies using DTS, but its reported mean is subsequently described as a PCL-5 score.

  • HADS anxiety study count changes from seven to six

    Minor

    The anxiety results first list seven studies using HADS, then describe six studies using it.

  • The sole STAI-S anxiety study is attributed to different authors

    Minor

    The instrument list identifies Mazza as the one STAI-S study, but the subsequent description identifies Mendez as the only study using STAI-S.

  • Competing-interest declarations disagree

    Minor

    One declaration discloses an honorarium received by RS, while the later declaration says all authors have no conflicts of interest.

6 of 6

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 79 references

7 of the 79 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Darley, 2021, Persistent symptoms up to four months after community and hospital-managed SARS-CoV-2 infection, The Medical Journal of Australia, 10.5694/mja2.50963 · DOI
  2. Hasan, 2021, Mental Health of the COVID-19 Patients in Bangladesh. Mymensingh medical journal, MMJ, 30, 189
  3. Yu, 2020, Prevalence of sleep disturbances during COVID-19 outbreak in an urban Chinese population: a cross-sectional study, Sleep Med., 74, 18, 10.1016/j.sleep.2020.07.009 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 101–200 of 381

Metadata

Authors
Bourmistrova, N. W., Solomon, T., Braude, P., Strawbridge, R., & Carter, B.
Affiliations
  • King's College London (GB)
  • North Bristol NHS Trust (GB)
Corresponding author
Carter, Ben
Venue
Journal of Affective Disorders
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2022-02
Volume
299
Pages
118-125
ISSN
0165-0327 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3213906311
Cited by
369
References
79
Citations by year
2026: 32 · 2025: 68 · 2024: 79 · 2023: 121 · 2022: 69
FWCI
8.93
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Affective Disorders (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › COVID-19 and Mental Health
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Clinical Neurology › Long-Term Effects of COVID-19
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Maternal Mental Health During Pregnancy and Postpartum
Keywords
COVID-19 pandemic, long-term psychological effects, post-COVID-19 mental health, generalized anxiety disorder, depression, post-traumatic stress disorder, sleep disorders, insomnia
MeSH terms
COVID-19, SARS-CoV-2, Anxiety, Depression, Female, Humans, Male, Mental Health, Middle Aged, Pandemics

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-07, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).

A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-07 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review