Cited by 221COVID-19 and Mental HealthStudent Stress and CopingMaternal Mental Health During Pregnancy and Postpartum

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 69 of the 69 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; 1 of the 34 sources its claims cite were checked for support.

Psychiatric symptoms, risk, and protective factors among university students in quarantine during the COVID-19 pandemic in China

Open access

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has made unprecedented impact on the psychological health of university students, a population vulnerable to distress and mental health disorders. This study investigated psychiatric symptoms (anxiety, depression, and traumatic stress) during state-enforced quarantine among university students in China ( N = 1912) through a cross-sectional survey during March and April 2020. Results: Psychiatric symptoms were alarmingly prevalent: 67.05% reported traumatic stress, 46.55% had depressive symptoms, and 34.73% reported anxiety symptoms. Further, 19.56% endorsed suicidal ideation. We explored risk and protective factors of psychological health, including demographic variables, two known protective factors for mental health (mindfulness, perceived social support), four COVID-specific factors (COVID-19 related efficacy, perceived COVID-19 threat, perceived COVID-19 societal stigma, COVID-19 prosocial behavior) and screen media usage. Across symptom domains, mindfulness was associated with lower symptom severity, while COVID-19 related financial stress, perceived COVID-19 societal stigma, and perceived COVID-19 threat were associated with higher symptom severity. COVID-19 threat and COVID-19 stigma showed main and interactive effects in predicting all mental health outcomes, with their combination associated with highest symptom severity. Screen media device usage was positively associated with depression. Female gender and COVID-19 prosocial behavior were associated with higher anxiety, while COVID-19 self-efficacy associated with lower anxiety symptoms. Conclusions: Findings suggest high need for psychological health promotion among university students during the COVID-19 pandemic and inform an ecological perspective on the detrimental role of stigma during an emerging infectious disease outbreak. Interventions targeting multi-level factors, such as promoting mindfulness and social support at individual and interpersonal levels while reducing public stigma about COVID-19, may be particularly promising. Attending to the needs of disadvantaged groups including those financially impacted by COVID-19 is needed.

Overview

AI snapshot

Written from the paper’s full text.

TL;DR

In a cross-sectional online survey of 1,912 Chinese university students during state-enforced COVID-19 quarantine, psychiatric symptoms were highly prevalent, with 67.05% reporting traumatic stress, 46.55% depressive symptoms, 34.73% anxiety symptoms, and 19.56% suicidal ideation. Mindfulness and social support were protective, while COVID-related financial stress, perceived COVID-19 threat, and perceived societal stigma were consistent risk factors, with threat and stigma interacting to predict all three symptom domains.

Key findings

  • Clinically elevated symptoms were common: 67.05% for COVID-19-related traumatic stress (mild or higher), 46.55% for depression, and 34.73% for anxiety; 19.56% reported some suicidal ideation in the past 2 weeks. Moderate-or-higher elevations were 17.67% for traumatic stress, 15.58% for depression, and 9.62% for anxiety.
  • Across anxiety, depression, and traumatic stress, mindfulness was associated with lower symptom severity, while COVID-19-related financial stress, perceived COVID-19 societal stigma, and perceived COVID-19 threat were associated with higher symptom severity. Perceived social support was negatively associated with anxiety and depression.
  • Perceived COVID-19 threat and perceived COVID-19 societal stigma showed significant main and interactive effects for all outcomes; their combination was associated with the highest symptom severity. Screen media usage was positively associated with depression; female gender and COVID-19 prosocial behavior were associated with higher anxiety, while COVID-19 self-efficacy was associated with lower anxiety.

Methods

  • Cross-sectional online survey conducted March 20–April 10, 2020, during state-enforced quarantine; participants were recruited via websites and WeChat-based platforms, including advertisements distributed through academic advisors at 19 Chinese universities, with snowball sharing encouraged.
  • Inclusion criteria: at least 18 years old, currently enrolled as an undergraduate or graduate student in a Chinese college/university, and fluent in Chinese; final sample was 1,912 students (mean age 20.28, SD = 2.10; 69.77% female; 91.84% undergraduate).
  • Measures included GAD-7 for anxiety, PHQ-9 for depression, IES for COVID-19-related traumatic stress, MAAS for mindfulness, adapted MSPSS for perceived social support, and adapted COVID-19-specific measures of prosocial behavior, self-efficacy, societal stigma, and perceived threat. Analyses used bivariate tests, multiple regression models, interaction terms for threat × stigma, simple slopes, and model comparison.

Limitations

  • The paper states that open internet recruitment may have attracted those highly impacted by COVID-19, potentially upwardly biasing symptom severity estimates; the sample was disproportionately female (69.77%), which may skew anxiety estimates and limit representativeness.
  • The cross-sectional design precludes causal inference; the IES measured only intrusion and avoidance clusters of PTSD symptoms, missing other symptom clusters; and self-report measures may be subject to biases such as social desirability, with clinician-rated measures preferable for prevalence.
  • The text also notes that the newly adapted COVID-19 prosocial behavior scale had not been validated, although exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses indicated a one-factor structure.

Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1186/s12992-021-00663-x

Cites

69 of 69 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Figures

Fig. 1 Interaction of Perceived COVID-19 threat X perceived COVID-19 societal stigma when predicting psychiatric symptoms
Fig. 1 Interaction of Perceived COVID-19 threat X perceived COVID-19 societal stigma when predicting psychiatric symptomsCC BY · PubMed Central

Verification

Claims the paper makes

70 Own result · 21 Not checked yet · 20 Own method · 9 Own interpretation · 1 Supported so far

Verify all 33 references — free account

Show all 84 claims

  • Probably not a substantial claim. 31
  • It may state two separate claims as one. 9
37 of 37
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The sample of 1912 Chinese university students recruited online is representative of Chinese university students during state-enforced quarantine.

    “Recruitment took place online through advertisements on websites and WeChat-based platforms targeting Chinese university students.”
    “The sample included 1912 Chinese university students.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The observed associations between predictors and psychiatric symptoms reflect causal risk or protective effects rather than reverse causation or unmeasured confounding.

    “We explored risk and protective factors of psychological health, including demographic variables, two known protective factors for mental health (mindfulness, perceived social support), four COVID-specific factors (COVID-19 related efficacy, perceived COVID-19 threat, perceived COVID-19 societal stigma, COVID-19 prosocial behavior) and screen media usage.”
    “Risk factors (i.e., positive correlates) for depressive symptoms included financial stress due to COVID-19 (β = 0.119), two COVID-specific risk factors (perceived COVID-19 threat: β = 0.109; perceived COVID-19 societal stigma: β = 0.238), and screen media device usage (β = 0.058).”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    No meta-analyses or nationally representative survey data are available estimating rates of clinically elevated anxiety or traumatic stress symptoms among Chinese university students.

    “To our knowledge, no meta-analyses or nationally representative survey data are available estimating rates of clinically elevated anxiety or traumatic stress symptoms among Chinese university students.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Stigma research has focused on victimized groups.

    “Thus far, stigma research has focused on victimized groups.”
4 of 4

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.

3 of 3

Citations

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Aiken LS, West SG. Multiple regression: Testin and interpreting interactions. Sage: Newbury Park; 1991.
  2. Cohen J, Cohen P, West SG, Aiken LS. Data-analytic strategies using multiple regression/correlation, in: applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences; 2003. p. 151–92.
  3. Zhao C, Wang X, Chang L. Reliability and validity of the impact of event scale in Chinese traumatic event suffers. Chinese Ment Heal J. 2003;17:679–81.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 221

Metadata

Authors
Sun, S., Goldberg, S. B., Lin, D., Qiao, S., & Operario, D.
Affiliations
  • Brown University (US)
  • University of Wisconsin–Madison (US)
  • Beijing Normal University (CN)
  • University of South Carolina (US)
Corresponding author
Lin, Danhua
Venue
Globalization and Health
Published
2021-01-25
Volume
17
Issue
1
Pages
15-15
ISSN
1744-8603 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3126110330
Cited by
221
References
69
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 38 · 2023: 49 · 2022: 56 · 2021: 60
FWCI
34.77
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Globalization and Health (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
  • Beijing Normal University (Fighting COVID Research Award)
  • National Institute of Mental Health (T32MH078788)
  • National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health (K23AT011173, K23AT010879-01)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › COVID-19 and Mental Health
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Student Stress and Coping
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Maternal Mental Health During Pregnancy and Postpartum
Keywords
COVID-19 pandemic, university students, quarantine, psychiatric symptoms, anxiety, depression, traumatic stress, suicidal ideation, COVID-19 stigma, threat perception, financial stress, mindfulness, social support, screen media use, prosocial behavior, self-efficacy, risk and protective factors
MeSH terms
COVID-19, Adolescent, Adult, Anxiety, Mental Disorders, China, Cross-Sectional Studies, Depression, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Quarantine, Risk Factors, Students, Universities, Stress Disorders, Traumatic, Young Adult, Pandemics, Protective Factors

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 2026-10-06, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).

A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-06 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).

Cited sources are checked with a language model’s help (gpt-6-sol).

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