Self-injury, suicidal ideation and -attempt and eating disorders in young people following the initial and second COVID-19 lockdown

  1. Stine Danielsen
  2. Andrea Joensen
  3. Per Kragh Andersen
  4. Trine Madsen
  5. Katrine Strandberg-Larsen

Reviewed by

Read the full article See related articles

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

Background

The initial COVID-19 lockdowns have had negative effect on different mental health measures, especially in young women. However, the impact on self-injury, suicidality and eating disorder (ED) are less elucidated and remains inconsistent. We compare self-reported self-injury, suicide ideation and -attempt and symptoms of EDs from before through different pandemic periods until spring 2021.

Methods

Young participants in the Danish National Birth Cohort reported these measures in an 18-year follow-up in 2015-2021 and in a COVID-19 survey in spring 2021 when participants were aged 19-24 years. Changes in measures from pre to post lockdown were estimated with longitudinal data (N=7,597) and with repeated cross-sectional data (N=24,625) by linear regression.

Findings

In the longitudinal comparisons 14% of women and 7% of men reported self-injury pre lockdown, which decreased 6%-points (95% CI:-7%;-5%) for women and 3%-points (95% CI:-4%;-2%) for men during lockdown. For suicide ideation, the pre lockdown proportions were 25% and 18% for women and men respectively, and decreased 7%-points (95% CI:-8%;-6%) for women and 3%-points (95% CI:-5%;-1%) for men. For suicide attempt no change was observed. Pre lockdown 15% and 3% of women and men, respectively, had symptoms of EDs, which decreased 2%-points (95% CI:-3%;-1%) for women. We observed no changes in proportions of self-injury, suicide ideation or EDs in the repeated cross-sectional data.

Interpretation

Our findings provide no support for increase in self-injury, suicidality and EDs following the lockdowns, and if anything, indicate a reduction in self-injury and suicide ideation as well as EDs in women.

Article activity feed

  1. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2022.03.08.22271980: (What is this?)

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

    Table 1: Rigor

    Ethicsnot detected.
    Sex as a biological variablenot detected.
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.

    Table 2: Resources

    No key resources detected.

    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: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

    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.
    • No funding statement was detected.
    • No protocol registration statement was detected.

    Results from scite Reference Check: We found no unreliable references.

    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.

  2. Version published to 10.1101/2022.03.08.22271980 on medRxiv