Financial hardship and social assistance as determinants of mental health and food and housing insecurity during the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States

  1. Daniel Kim

Reviewed by

Read the full article See related articles

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

No abstract available

Article activity feed

  1. Version published to 10.1016/j.ssmph.2021.100862
  2. Version published to 10.1101/2020.12.24.20248835v2 on medRxiv
  3. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2020.12.24.20248835: (What is this?)

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

    Table 1: Rigor

    Institutional Review Board Statementnot detected.
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.
    Sex as a biological variablenot detected.

    Table 2: Resources

    Software and Algorithms
    SentencesResources
    Supplemental Nutritional Assistance Program (SNAP) receipt was defined as household participation in SNAP and using SNAP benefits to meet spending needs within the previous week.9 Outcomes: Outcomes consisted of the frequency of anxiety and depressive symptoms (using the 2-item Generalized Anxiety Disorder-2 and Patient Health Questionnaire-2, respectively, for scores of 3-6 vs 0-2 to screen for anxiety and depressive disorders, with acceptable sensitivity and specificity levels10), the level of food insufficiency (often or sometimes not enough to eat vs enough to eat), and, among housing renters, the likelihood of being evicted within the next 2 months (very/extremely likely vs somewhat/not at all likely).
    Nutritional Assistance Program
    suggested: None
    SNAP
    suggested: (SNAP, RRID:SCR_007936)
    All analyses were conducted using SAS version 9.4 (SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC).
    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:
    Nonetheless, there are limitations to this study. Because of the study’s cross-sectional and observational design, bias due to reverse causation or confounding cannot be entirely ruled out. Moreover, we were unable to account for the received monetary amounts of UI and SNAP benefits. While sampling weights accounted for non-response, the low survey response rates could have led to selection bias. Last, all measures were based on self-report, although the adjustment for general health status in all models should have attenuated the degree of same-source bias. There is evidence to support that during the period that the CARES Act was in effect during the initial phase of the pandemic, among adults whose families lost work or work-related income due to the pandemic, the level of social assistance including the $600 weekly federal bonus for UI recipients was adequate to meet financial needs.13 UI receipt was linked to a 3-percentage point reduction in the share reporting food insecurity, a 3.7 percentage-point reduction in problems paying utility bills, and reductions of 8.6 to 15.1 percentage points in the share worrying about meeting basic needs.13 Overall, the findings from the present study suggest the importance of financial hardship as a fundamental cause14 and social determinant of mental health and social needs during the COVID-19 pandemic, and point to the urgent need for direct and sustained cash relief well in excess of current levels of social assistance, as well as t...

    Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.

    Results from Barzooka: We found bar graphs of continuous data. We recommend replacing bar graphs with more informative graphics, as many different datasets can lead to the same bar graph. The actual data may suggest different conclusions from the summary statistics. For more information, please see Weissgerber et al (2015).

    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.

  4. Version published to 10.1101/2020.12.24.20248835v1 on medRxiv