Who maintains good mental health in a locked-down country? A French nationwide online survey of 11,391 participants

  1. Frédéric Haesebaert
  2. Julie Haesebaert
  3. Elodie Zante
  4. Nicolas Franck

Reviewed by

Read the full article

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

No abstract available

Article activity feed

  1. Version published to 10.1016/j.healthplace.2020.102440
  2. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2020.05.03.20089755: (What is this?)

    Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.

    Table 1: Rigor

    Institutional Review Board StatementIRB: In line with French regulations on health research, no ethics committee approval was required because data collection was anonymous.
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.
    Sex as a biological variablenot detected.

    Table 2: Resources

    Software and Algorithms
    SentencesResources
    Statistics were performed using SAS software 9.4 version (SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC, USA).
    SAS
    suggested: (SASqPCR, RRID:SCR_003056)
    SAS Institute
    suggested: (Statistical Analysis System, RRID:SCR_008567)

    Results from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did not detect open code. Researchers are encouraged to share open data when possible (see Nature blog).

    Results from LimitationRecognizer: We detected the following sentences addressing limitations in the study:
    Limitations: This study has some limitations. First, respondents may not be representative of the whole French population due to the sampling method. However, the large sample size and weighting of major sociodemographic characteristics reduce this selection bias. Second, numerous variables influence mental wellbeing, and we are aware that this brief report only included a few of them. Further studies will examine the impact of global lockdown in France and worldwide with greater granularity, but currently there is an urgent need to inform authorities on early determinants affecting mental wellbeing.

    Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.

    Results from Barzooka: We did not find any issues relating to the usage of bar graphs.

    Results from JetFighter: We did not find any issues relating to colormaps.

    Results from rtransparent:
    • Thank you for including a conflict of interest statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • Thank you for including a funding statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • No protocol registration statement was detected.

    About SciScore

    SciScore is an automated tool that is designed to assist expert reviewers by finding and presenting formulaic information scattered throughout a paper in a standard, easy to digest format. SciScore checks for the presence and correctness of RRIDs (research resource identifiers), and for rigor criteria such as sex and investigator blinding. For details on the theoretical underpinning of rigor criteria and the tools shown here, including references cited, please follow this link.

  3. Version published to 10.1101/2020.05.03.20089755v1 on medRxiv