Have Deaths of Despair Risen during the COVID-19 Pandemic? A Systematic Review

  1. Hania Rahimi-Ardabili
  2. Xiaoqi Feng
  3. Phi-Yen Nguyen
  4. Thomas Astell-Burt

Reviewed by

Read the full article

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

This systematic review synthesized literature on potential impacts of protracted isolation and other disruptions during the COVID-19 pandemic on deaths of despair (suicide, overdoses, and drug-related liver diseases). Five electronic databases were searched yielding 70 eligible articles. Extant evidence mostly from high-income countries indicates COVID-19-related disruption may not have influenced suicide rates so far, but there have been reports of increased drug-related and liver disease mortality. Minority groups and women were more vulnerable, indicating the need for stronger equity focus on pandemic recovery and resilience strategies. Further high-quality studies with longer-term follow-up, especially from low-income countries, will inform these strategies.

Article activity feed

  1. Version published to 10.3390/ijerph191912835
  2. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2022.04.05.22272397: (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

    Software and Algorithms
    SentencesResources
    Search Strategies: The following electronic databases were searched on 29 Aug 2021: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, CINAHL and PsycINFO.
    MEDLINE
    suggested: (MEDLINE, RRID:SCR_002185)
    EMBASE
    suggested: (EMBASE, RRID:SCR_001650)
    PsycINFO
    suggested: (PsycINFO, RRID:SCR_014799)
    Study selection was completed via a two-step screening process using Covidence software (Veritas Health Innovation, Australia).
    Covidence
    suggested: (Covidence, RRID:SCR_016484)

    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:
    Note that studies mainly conducted a preliminary data analysis, with several limitations, and the mid-to-longer-term impact of COVID-19 on deaths of despair is to fully emerge. There were several limitations to the studies that may alter the results. Studies are ecological or cross-sectional in design, mainly had low qualities, and a considerable number of them did not conduct any inferential analysis or only conducted basic comparison without taking account of underlying confounders such as time trends and population on growth. For example, only some of studies used more advanced statistical methods such as interrupted time-series 8,24,27,28,36,51-54,56-59,61-63,66 to compare pandemic with pre-pandemic periods. Further 14 studies were either case report or did not use any control group (pre-pandemic period). This could pause a remarkable bias to findings. Data on most recent death cases, particularly in suicide and overdose cases, could be the least reliable and subject to undercounts. As unnatural death case examinations may take an extended amount of time. Further, during the pandemic, the data-collection processes may be disrupted further. Some of the studies were also published as editorials, such as a letter to editor or commentary where they may not have been gone through a peer-review process. Findings regarding suicide death rates during the pandemic are consistent with a study that analysed data from 21 countries showing either no changes or reductions in suicide 8....

    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.

    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.

  3. Version published to 10.1101/2022.04.05.22272397v1 on medRxiv