Next Article in Journal
What Is the Benefit of Ramped Pulse Shapes for Activating Auditory Cortex Neurons? An Electrophysiological Study in an Animal Model of Cochlear Implant
Previous Article in Journal
Histologic Definition of Enhancing Core and FLAIR Hyperintensity Region of Glioblastoma, IDH-Wild Type: A Clinico-Pathologic Study on a Single-Institution Series
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Brain Sciences
Volume 13
Issue 2
10.3390/brainsci13020249
brainsci-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Psychosocial Factors Associated with Memory Complaints during the First Wave of the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Multi-Country Survey

by
Morenike Oluwatoyin Folayan
1,2,3,*,
Roberto Ariel Abeldaño Zuñiga
1,4,
Jorma I. Virtanen
1,5,
Oliver C. Ezechi
1,3,
Nourhan M. Aly
1,6,
Joanne Lusher
1,7,
Annie L. Nguyen
1,8 and
Maha El Tantawi
1,7
1
MEHEWE Study Group, Obafemi Awolowo University, Ile-Ife 220282, Nigeria
2
Department of Child Dental Health, Obafemi Awolowo University, Ile-Ife 220282, Nigeria
3
The Centre for Reproductive and Population Health Studies, Nigerian Institute of Medical Research, Yaba, Lagos 101212, Nigeria
4
Postgraduate Department, University of Sierra Sur, Oaxaca 70805, Mexico
5
Faculty of Medicine, University of Bergen, 5020 Bergen, Norway
6
Department of Pediatric Dentistry and Dental Public Health, Faculty of Dentistry, Alexandria University, Alexandria 21527, Egypt
7
Provost’s Group, Regent’s University, London E14 2BE, UK
8
Department of Family Medicine, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 91803, USA
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Brain Sci. 2023, 13(2), 249; https://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci13020249
Submission received: 25 December 2022 / Revised: 28 January 2023 / Accepted: 31 January 2023 / Published: 31 January 2023
(This article belongs to the Section Neurodegenerative Diseases)
Review Reports Versions Notes

Abstract

:
This study assessed the associations between psychosocial factors (social isolation, social support, financial support and emotional distress) and memory complaints during the COVID-19 pandemic. This was a secondary analysis of data extracted from the dataset of participants recruited from 151 countries for a COVID-19 related mental health and wellness study between June and December 2020. The dependent variable was memory complaint, measured using the Memory Complaint Questionnaire. The independent variables were perception of social isolation, social support, financial support, emotional distress and history of SARS-CoV-19 infection. Confounding variables were age, sex at birth, level of education, employment status, HIV status and country-income level. Multivariable logistic regression was used to determine the associations between the dependent and independent variables after adjusting for the confounders. Of the 14825 participants whose data was extracted, 2460 (16.6%) had memory complaints. Participants who felt socially isolated (AOR: 1.422; 95% CI: 1.286–1.571), emotionally distressed (AOR: 2.042; 95% CI: 1.850–2.253) and with history of SARS-CoV-19 infection (AOR: 1.369; 95% CI: 1.139–1.646) had significantly higher odds of memory complaints. Participants who perceived they had social and financial support had significantly lower odds of memory complaints (AOR: 0.655; 95% CI: 0.571–0.751). Future management of pandemics like the COVID-19 should promote access to social and financial support and reduce the risk of social isolation and emotional distress.

1. Introduction

Cognitive problems appear to be a consistent feature of COVID-19, with up to a fifth of patients with COVID-19 having memory complaints [1]. Cognitive problems are associated with mild, moderate and severe forms of COVID-19, with prevalence increasing with the severity of COVID-19 [2] where the infection affects the nervous system [3]. Patients with COVID-19 seem to lose grey matter volume, thereby increasing the risk of impaired processing of information in the brain, and the impact on the management of emotions, memories and movements [4,5,6]. There is also the possibility of trans-synaptic viral spread to cortical regions, including the hippocampus, following invasion of the peripheral olfactory neurons with a negative impact on the spatial and episodic memory [7,8,9,10,11].
There may also be other factors associated with cognitive problems during the COVID-19 infection. For instance, COVID-19 causes critical illnesses that lead to delirium and acute respiratory distress syndrome, both of which are associated with cognitive impairment [12]. Also, the hypoxia and elevated glucocorticoid concentrations associated with COVID-19 infection make the brain, especially the hippocampus, more vulnerable to damage that affects memory [13,14].
A number of sociodemographic factors are associated with a higher risk of cognitive problems due to COVID-19. These include lower education and social support [15,16,17]. Low education could lead to limited memory capacity, while people with high education levels could maintain or increase their cognitive functional development through frequent stimulation of the brain during daily life [18,19]. Unemployment also limits access to employment-induced cognitive health benefits [20]. Also, low social support reduces mental stimulation and decreases cerebral neuronal growth, thereby expediting cognitive decline [21]. In addition, low social support reduces active participation in community activities and increases the risk of cognitive problems [22,23]. Furthermore, emotion has been inextricably linked to cognitive processes [24]. For example, depression increases the risk of cognitive impairment [25], as do other forms of emotional stress [26]. Cognitive decline is also associated with HIV infection as the disease progresses [27].
Although several studies have reported multiple symptoms that persist after recovery from COVID-19 infection, there are few studies reporting the cognitive impairment associated with the disease. One of the earliest assessments is memory complaints. Memory complaints are early symptom neurodegenerative disorders, occurring on the pathway to cognitive decline and dementia [28,29,30]. This study attempts to address this gap in knowledge by investigating factors that might be associated with memory complaints during the COVID-19 pandemic. Specifically, the present study assessed the associations between psychosocial factors (social isolation, social support, financial support and emotional distress) and memory complaints during the COVID-19 pandemic. It was hypothesised that social isolation and emotional distress would be directly associated with memory complaints, while access to social and financial support would be inversely associated with memory complaints.

2. Materials and Methods

Ethical approval for the study was obtained from the Human Research Ethics Committee at the Institute of Public Health of the Obafemi Awolowo University Ile-Ife, Nigeria (HREC No: IPHOAU/12/1557), Brazil (CAAE N° 38423820.2.0000.0010), India (D-1791-uz and D-1790-uz), Saudi Arabia (CODJU-2006F) and United Kingdom (13283/10570) for the conducting of the primary study. Participants checked a box to indicate consent before participating in the online survey.

2.1. Sample Size

This primary study recruited 21,106 participants from 152 countries between July and December 2020 through an online survey. Participation was open to anyone 18 years and above if they could access the survey over the internet using an electronic device and if they could understand the languages of the survey (English, French, Spanish, Arabic and Portuguese). There were no exclusion criteria. The sample size was considered adequate as it was set at 35 valid respondents from each of the 193 member States of the United Nations. The sample size was increased by 10% because of the risk of missing responses in the absence of guidance, support and motivation for survey response when collecting data online [31]. Online data collection was carried out in view of the restrictions during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic when these data were collected.
From this study, the extracted data of 14,825 participants (70.2% of the dataset of the primary study) were considered adequate for statistical modelling since a minimum of 10 participants with complete responses per dependent variable existed. This enabled the performance of regression analyses with a minimum probability level (p-value) of 0.05 [32].

2.2. Recruitment Procedure

Details of the study, including the recruitment process, have been previously published [33,34,35,36]. Non-probability sampling was employed with recruitment driven by the 45 members of the MEHEWE Study group (www.mehewe.org (accessed on 24 December 2022)). The survey link was shared with contacts around the world using social media platforms (Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram), network email lists and WhatsApp groups. Details concerning the conducting of the survey and the data collection tools are published elsewhere [35].

2.3. Data Collection Tools

In brief, the data collection tool was validated using both quantitative and qualitative assessments [35]. The instrument was first developed in English and translated into French, Spanish, Arabic and Portuguese. The translations were back-translated to English to ensure that they retained their meaning. The overall content validation index for the questionnaire was 0.83. The dimensionality and reliability of the tool was also assessed. The details on the validation of the data collection tool had also been published elsewhere [35].
Data were collected anonymously. The privacy of participants and the confidentiality of the information provided was protected by decoupling the IP addresses from the questionnaire at the end of the online survey. The questionnaire also did not install any tracker cookies on the devices of the respondents. Data were collected using SurveyMonkey® which provides a secured, SSL encrypted connection link. Data in transit (while responding online) were encrypted using secure TLS cryptographic protocols. The collection tool was certified in compliance with the EU-U.S. Privacy Shield Framework and Swiss-U.S. Privacy Shield.

2.4. Dependent Variable

Data were collected on memory complaints using the Memory Complaint Questionnaire [37] that had been validated for use as a self-reported memory questionnaire. The tool consists of six questions on memory functioning in daily circumstances. Participants were asked to compare and evaluate their current performance to that before the COVID-19 pandemic. The total score ranges from 7 to 35, with higher values indicating subjective memory loss. Scores higher than or equal to 25 are indicative of memory impairment. Participants were grouped into those without significant memory complaints (Memory Complaint Questionnaire scores of <25) and those with significant memory complaints (Memory Complaint Questionnaire scores of ≥25) [37]. The content validity index (CVI) for the section of the questionnaire was 0.90, the ICC was 0.71 and the Cronbach alpha score was 0.94 [35].

2.5. Independent Variables

Social isolation, social support and financial support: Participants were asked to identify how socially isolated they felt compared to before the COVID-19 pandemic. Response options were the same, less socially isolated, more socially isolated. The social isolation variable was dichotomised into same/less socially isolated versus more socially isolated. Also, participants were asked about their perceived access to social and financial support during the COVID-19 pandemic. Response options were ‘yes’ or ‘no’. These questions were adopted from the Coronavirus Health Impact Survey (CRISIS) Adult Self-Report Baseline questionnaire [38]. The CVI for this section of the questionnaire was 0.90, the ICC was 0.89 and the Cronbach alpha score was 0.93 [35].
Emotional distress: Participants were asked if they had experienced any form of emotional distress (frustration or boredom, anxiety, depression, loneliness, anger and grief/ feeling of loss) during the pandemic by checking a box against the emotions experienced. Respondents who did not check a response were categorised as not having emotional distress during the pandemic. The CVI for this section of the questionnaire was 0.90 [35].
SARS-CoV-19 infection: Participants were asked to identify if they had had a SARS-CoV-19 infection by ticking a checkbox. A tick of the checkbox was an indication of having a history of SARS-CoV-19 infection (yes). All those who did not tick the box were categorised as not having had SARS-CoV-19 infection at the time of the survey (no).

2.6. Confounders

Sociodemographic variables: Data were extracted about age at last birthday; sex at birth (male, female and others dichotomised into male and non-male), level of education (no formal education, primary, secondary and college/university), and employment status (retiree, student, employed and unemployed).
HIV status: Participants identified their HIV status by checking off a list of 27 medical ailments. A tick on the checkbox for HIV was an indication that the individual was living with HIV. The list of medical ailments was adopted from Marg et al. [39]. The CVI for the section of the questionnaire that contained details on the HIV status during the pandemic was 0.71 [35].
Country income level: Information about the country income level was obtained from publicly available data of the World Bank Data Bank [40]. Countries were classified into low-income countries (LIC) with a gross national income (GNI) per capita ≤ 1035 USD in 2019, lower-middle-income countries (LMIC) with GNI between 1036 and 4045 USD, upper-middle-income countries (UMIC) with GNI between 4046 and 12,535 USD and high-income countries (HIC) with GNI ≥ 12,536 USD.

2.7. Data Analysis

Raw data were downloaded, cleaned, and imported to SPSS version 23.0 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA) for analyses. A description of the variables was conducted. Bivariate analysis included comparing participants with and without memory complaints regarding the confounders and independent variables using chi squared test (and t test for age), followed by an estimation of effect size using Phi squared (and r squared for age). Squared values of 0.01–0.09 indicate small effect sizes, 0.10–0.24 indicate medium effect sizes, 0.25 to 0.49 indicate large effect sizes and greater than 0.49 indicate very large effect sizes [41,42]. Also, a multivariable regression analysis was used to determine the associations between the dependent and independent variables after adjusting for the confounders. Adjusted odds ratios (AOR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated. Statistical significance was set at 5%.

3. Results

Table 1 shows that the 14,729 participants had ages ranging from 18–99 years and a mean (standard deviation) age of 35.3 (12.8) years. There were 9222 (62.6%) females, 11568 (78.0%) with college/university level of education, 8625 (58.2%) employed and 7845 (52.9%) living in high-income countries at the time of collecting the data.
Of the 14,729 participants, 2446 (16.6%) reported memory complaints. People who reported memory complaints were 1747 (19.6%) of 8934 participants who reported social isolation, 2093 (15.6%) of 13,381 who perceived they had social and financial support, 1680 (21.7%) of 7747 participants who felt emotionally distressed, and 160 (22.5%) of the 736 participants who had a history of SARS-CoV-19 infection.
Participants who reported social isolation (AOR: 1.376; 95% CI: 1.243–1.522; p < 0.001), emotional distress (AOR: 2.071; 95% CI: 1.875–2.288; p < 0.001) and who had a history of SARS-CoV-19 infection (AOR: 1.394; 95% CI: 1.154–1.681; p = 0.001) had significantly higher odds of memory complaints than participants who did not feel socially isolated, who did not feel emotionally distressed and who did not have SARS-CoV-19 infection, respectively. By contrast, participants who perceived they had social and financial support had significantly lower odds of memory complaints than participants who did not have social and financial support (AOR: 0.655; 95% CI: 0.571–0.751; p < 0.001).
Table 1 also shows that the Phi2 coefficients indicating effect size for social isolation, social and financial support, emotional distress and SAR-COV-19 infection were minuscule. (Phi2 = 0.01, 0.01, 0.02 and 0.001).

4. Discussion

In support of the hypotheses, the results of this current study suggest that people who felt socially isolated, emotionally distressed and who had a history of SARS-CoV-19 infection during the COVID-19 pandemic were more likely to experience memory complaints than those who did not experience any of these. Also, access to social and financial support during the pandemic reduced the risk of memory complaints.
One strength of this study is that it provides further evidence of a relationship between psychosocial factors and mental health [43]. It also contributes to the evolving evidence that memory complaints are associated with the COVID-19 pandemic. Moreover, this study generates new evidence from a large global sample. Nevertheless, findings do need to be considered in the light of the cross-sectional nature of the design, and respect that direct cause-inferential deductions cannot be inferred from these results. The study participants were also recruited online inadvertently making those without smartphones and internet access ineligible for participation. In addition, the survey was conducted in only a few languages, thereby excluding those who do not understand the languages the survey was conducted in. These factors thereby limit the generalisability of the findings to some extent. In addition, confounding variables such as comorbidities and types of medications that can affect memory were not adjusted for. We were unable to conduct these adjustments because the relevant information was not available in the dataset. Furthermore, the measure for emotion stress was carried out using a respondent-rated single-item question. Single-item measures of emotional stress such as depression have, however, been found to be highly specific and appropriate for ruling out cases. Single-item questions, however, have low sensitivity with implications for the underestimation of the cases of emotional stress in this study cohort [44]. We also acknowledge that culture may affect the way information is filtered into the memory and can affect memory specificity and memory resolution for previously-encoded items [45]. Cultural differences were not adjusted for as a confounder in this study. Despite these limitations, the study does generate new and useful information that serves as leading to more interesting hypotheses that could go on to further inform program planning in the management of future pandemics.
Psychosocial factors are considered important in the aetiology of mental health problems. Mental health problems such as memory impairment may result from the interplay of several variables, including environmental stressors, personal and environmental resources and the individual’s appraisal and coping responses to specific stressful events [46]. Several models have described how mental health outcomes may be affected by psychosocial factors including emotional, behavioural and physiological stressors contributing to strain and poor health [47]. The present study findings suggest that psychosocial factors may affect mental health through pathways that promote cognitive degeneration. Psychosocial factors may cause cognitive degeneration through multiple neurobiological mechanisms such as those associated with cerebral infarction, and neurodegenerative pathologies. Other pathways may be independent of the traditional pathological pathways [48].
We observed that social isolation is associated with memory complaints during the COVID-19 pandemic. Prior studies had identified that social isolation has a detrimental effect on the memory because of a lack of social stimulation on the brain, resulting from low levels of social contacts [49,50]. This leads to lower cognitive reserve, poorer resilience of the brain and cognitive impairment [51,52,53,54]. Social isolation may also induce emotional distress [55]. The COVID-19 pandemic contributed significantly to social isolation [56], emotional distress [57] and high risk of poor access to social and financial support, especially for those who had COVID-19 [58]. Prior studies raised concerns about the negative impact of lockdown during the COVID-19 pandemic on feelings of isolation leading to emotional distress, health problems and early mortality [59]. Others have argued against isolation on ethical grounds [60]. We provide suggestive evidence here that the lockdown and accompanying feelings of social isolation and emotional distress may actually contribute to memory complaints. The study, however, did not preclude the possibility that memory decline may have led to social isolation as this is another plausible interpretation of the direction of events [61]. Further studies are necessary to elucidate the direction of effect between social isolation and emotional distress, over time, though this is likely to be somewhat multidirectional, with no clear pathway. The study results, however, indicate that the effect size of social isolation and emotional distress on memory complaints is minuscule, indicating an extremely weak psychological effect.
As the study findings indicate, access to social and financial support during the COVID-19 pandemic appeared to be associated with lower odds of memory complaints. It is known that social support improves mood and reduces the risk of cognitive impairment [62]. Social support has also been shown to provide a buffer against functional decline for people with depression [63]. The study results, however, indicate that the effect size is minuscule, indicating an extremely weak psychological effect. The pathway is, however, poorly studied and further studies are needed to better understand the neurobiological mechanisms that underpin this phenomenon.
Ongoing studies on the association between SARS-CoV-19 infection and memory complaints have indicated that there are neurobiological mechanisms linking the two phenomena [7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14]. Our study findings extend and reinforce prior evidence of an association between SARS-CoV-19 infection and memory complaints, although the effect size is minuscule. The evidence so far suggests that mental health support in the form of cognitive health care should be instituted for all those with SARS-CoV-19 infection. Cognitive health care promotes the ability to clearly think, learn and remember, which supports the effective performance of everyday activities [64].

5. Conclusions

In conclusion, social isolation, emotional distress and a history of SARS-CoV-19 infection were likely possible risk factors for memory complaints during the COVID-19 pandemic, though their effects on memory complaints were very small. Access to social and financial support seems to be associated with a lower risk of memory complaints. The future management of pandemics like COVID-19 should promote access to social and financial support and reduce the risk of social isolation and emotional distress.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, M.O.F.; methodology, M.O.F., A.L.N., M.E.T. and O.C.E.; validation, M.O.F. and A.L.N.; formal analysis, R.A.A.Z.; data curation, N.M.A.; writing—original draft preparation, M.O.F.; writing—review and editing, M.O.F., R.A.A.Z., J.I.V., O.C.E., N.M.A., J.L., A.L.N. and M.E.T.; supervision, M.O.F.; project administration, M.O.F., A.L.N., O.C.E., M.E.T. and N.M.A. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki. Ethical approval for the study was obtained from the Human Research Ethics Committee at the Institute of Public Health of the Obafemi Awolowo University Ile-Ife, Nigeria (HREC No: IPHOAU/12/1557), Brazil (CAAE N° 38423820.2.0000.0010), India (D-1791-uz and D-1790-uz), Saudi Arabia (CODJU-2006F) and United Kingdom (13283/10570).

Informed Consent Statement

Consent was obtained from all participants involved in the study.

Data Availability Statement

Data are available upon request.

Acknowledgments

The authors wish to thank all those who participated in this study.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Ahmed, M.; Roy, S.; Iktidar, M.A.; Chowdhury, S.; Akhter, S.; Khairul Islam, A.M.; Hawlader, M.D.H. Post-COVID-19 Memory Complaints: Prevalence and Associated Factors. Neurologia. 2022, in press. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Rass, V.; Beer, R.; Schiefecker, A.J.; Kofler, M.; Lindner, A.; Mahlknecht, P.; Heim, B.; Limmert, V.; Sahanic, S.; Pizzini, A.; et al. Neurological outcome and quality of life 3 months after COVID-19: A prospective observational cohort study. Eur. J. Neurol. Off. J. Eur. Fed. Neurol. Soc. 2021, 28, 3348–3359. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Koralnik, I.J.; Tyler, K.L. COVID-19: A global threat to the nervous system. Ann. Neurol. 2020, 88, 1–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Lu, Y.; Li, X.; Geng, D.; Mei, N.; Wu, P.-Y.; Huang, C.-C.; Jia, T.; Zhao, Y.; Wang, D.; Xiao, A.; et al. Cerebral micro-structural changes in COVID-19 patients—An MRI-based 3-month follow-up study: A brief title: Cerebral changes in COVID-19. Eclinicalmedicine 2020, 25, 100484. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Van Petten, C.; Plante, E.; Davidson, P.S.R.; Kuo, T.Y.; Bajuscak, L.; Glisky, E.L. Memory and executive function in older adults: Relationships with temporal and prefrontal gray matter volumes and white matter hyperintensities. Neuropsychologia 2004, 42, 1313–1335. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Douaud, G.; Lee, S.; Alfaro-Almagro, F.; Arthofer, C.; Wang, C.; Lange, F.; Andersson, J.L.R.; Griffanti, P.; Duff, E.; Jbabdi, S.; et al. Brain imaging before and after COVID19 in UK Biobank. MedRxiv: Prepr. Serv. Health Sci. 2021. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Han, A.Y.; Mukdad, L.; Long, J.L.; Lopez, I.A. Anosmia in COVID19: Mechanisms and significance. Chem. Sens. 2020, 45, 423–428. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  8. Ritchie, K.; Chan, D.; Watermeyer, T. The cognitive consequences of the COVID-19 epidemic: Collateral damage? Brain Commun. 2020, 2, fcaa069. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  9. Eichenbaum, H. The hippocampus and declarative memory: Cognitive mechanisms and neural codes. Behav. Brain Res. 2001, 127, 199–207. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  10. Scoviille, W.B.; Milner, B. Loss of recent memory after bilateral hippocampal lesions. J. Neurol. Neurosurg. Psychiat. 1957, 20, 11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  11. Keenan, P.A.; Jacobson, M.W.; Soleymani, R.M.; Mayes, M.D.; Stress, M.E.; Yaldoo, D.T. The effect on memory of chronic prednisone treatment in patients with systemic disease. Neurology 1996, 47, 1396–1402. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  12. Pfoh, E.R.; Chan, K.S.; Dinglas, V.D.; Girard, T.D.; Jackson, J.C.; Morris, P.E.; Hough, C.L.; Mendez-Tellez, P.A.; Ely, E.W.; Huang, M.; et al. Cognitive screening among acute respiratory failure survivors: A cross-sectional evaluation of the mini-mental state examination. Crit. Care Off. J. Crit. Care Forum 2015, 19, 220. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  13. Hossmann, K. The hypoxic brain. Insights from ischemia research. Adv. Exp. Med. Biol. 1999, 474, 155–169. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  14. Starkman, M.N.; Gebarski, S.S.; Berent, S.; Schteingart, D.E. Hippocampal formation volume, memory dysfunction, and cortisol levels in patients with Cushing’s syndrome. Biol. Psychiatry 1992, 32, 756–765. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  15. Yen, Y.C.; Yang, M.J.; Shih, C.H.; Lung, F.W. Cognitive impairment and associated risk factors among aged community members. Int. J. Geriatr. Psychiatry 2004, 19, 564–569. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. van Hooren, S.A.; Valentijn, A.M.; Bosma, H.; Ponds, R.W.; van Boxtel, M.P.; Jolles, J. Cognitive functioning in healthy older adults aged 64–81: A cohort study into the effects of age, sex, and education. Neuropsychol. Dev. Cogn. B Aging Neuropsychol. Cogn. 2007, 14, 40–54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Anderson, T.M.; Sachdev, P.S.; Brodaty, H.; Trollor, J.N.; Andrews, G. Effects of sociodemographic and health variables on Mini-Mental State Exam scores in older Australians. Am. J. Geriatr. Psychiatry. 2007, 15, 467–476. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  18. Coyle, J.T. Use it or lose it--do effortful mental activities protect against dementia? N. Engl. J. Med. 2003, 348, 2489–2490. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  19. Wu, M.-S.; Lan, T.-H.; Chen, C.-M.; Chiu, H.-C.; Lan, T.-Y. Socio-demographic and health-related factors associated with cognitive impairment in the elderly in Taiwan. BMC Public Health 2011, 11, 22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  20. Vance, D.E.; Bail, J.; Enah, C.C.; Palmer, J.J.; Hoenig, A.K. The impact of employment on cognition and cognitive reserve: Implications across diseases and aging. Nurs. Res. Rev. 2016, 6, 61–71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  21. Yeh, S.C.; Liu, Y.Y. Influence of social support on cognitive function in the elderly. BMC Health Serv. Res. 2003, 3, 9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  22. Bassuk, S.S.; Glass, T.A.; Berkman, L.F. Social disengagement and incident cognitive decline in community-dwelling elderly persons. Ann. Intern Med. 1999, 131, 165–173. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. Zunzunegui, M.V.; Alvarado, B.E.; Del Ser, T.; Otero, A. Social networks, social integration, and social engagement determine cognitive decline in community-dwelling Spanish older adults. J. Gerontol. B Psychol. Sci. Soc. Sci. 2003, 58, S93–S100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  24. Hendrie, H.C.; Albert, M.S.; Butters, M.A.; Gao, S.; Knopman, D.S.; Launer, L.J.; Yaffe, K.; Cuthbert, B.N.; Edwards, E.; Wagster, M.V. The NIH Cognitive and Emotional Health Project: Report of the Critical Evaluation Study Committee. Alzheimer’s Dement. 2006, 2, 12–32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. Dotson, V.M.; Resnick, S.M.; Zonderman, A.B. Differential association of concurrent, baseline, and average depressive symptoms with cognitive decline in older adults. Am. J. Geriatr. Psychiatry 2008, 16, 318–330. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  26. Lee, J.; Paddock, S.M.; Feeney, K. Emotional distress and cognitive functioning of older couples: A dyadic analysis. J. Aging Health 2012, 24, 113–140. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  27. Alford, K.; Banerjee, S.; Nixon, E.; O’Brien, C.; Pounds, O.; Butler, A.; Elphick, C.; Henshaw, P.; Anderson, S.; Vera, J.H. Assessment and Management of HIV-Associated Cognitive Impairment: Experience from a Multidisciplinary Memory Service for People Living with HIV. Brain Sci. 2019, 9, 37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  28. Wu, Y.Y.; Hsu, W.C.; Huang, Y.H.; Ho, W.M.; Chen, Y.C. Memory Complaint Is a Surrogate for Memory Decline in the Middle-Aged: A Register-Based Study. J. Clin. Med. 2019, 8, 1900. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  29. Arvanitakis, Z.; Leurgans, S.E.; Fleischman, D.A.; Schneider, J.A.; Rajan, K.B.; Pruzin, J.J.; Shah, R.C.; Evans, D.A.; Barnes, L.L.; Bennett, D.A. Memory complaints, dementia, and neuropathology in older blacks and whites. Ann. Neurol. 2018, 83, 718–729. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Warren, S.L.; Reid, E.; Whitfield, P.; Moustafa, A.A. Subjective memory complaints as a predictor of mild cognitive impairment and Alzheimer’s disease. Discov. Psychol. 2022, 2, 13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Mirzaei, A.; Carter, S.R.; Patanwala, A.E.; Schneider, C.R. Missing data in surveys: Key concepts, approaches, and applications. Res. Soc. Adm. Pharm. 2022, 18, 2308–2316. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Wilson VanVoorhis, C.R.; Morgan, B.L. Understanding power rules of thumb for determining sample sizes. Tutor. Quant. Methods Psychol. 2007, 3, 43–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Nguyen, A.L.; Brown, B.; Tantawi, M.E.; Ndembi, N.; Okeibunor, J.; Mohammed, A.; Folayan, M.O. Time to Scale-up Research Collaborations to Address the Global Impact of COVID-19—A Commentary. Health Behav. Policy Rev. 2021, 8, 277–280. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  34. Ellakany, P.; Zuñiga, R.A.A.; El Tantawi, M.; Brown, B.; Aly, N.M.; Ezechi, O.; Uzochukwu, B.; Abeldaño, G.F.; Ara, E.; Ayanore, M.A.; et al. Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on student’ sleep patterns, sexual activity, screen use, and food intake: A global survey. PLoS ONE 2022, 17, e0262617. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  35. El Tantawi, M.; Folayan, M.O.; Nguyen, A.L.; Aly, N.M.; Ezechi, O.; Uzochukwu, B.S.C.; Alaba, O.A.; Brown, B. Validation of a COVID-19 mental health and wellness survey questionnaire. BMC Public Health 2022, 22, 1509. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  36. Folayan, M.O.; Ibigbami, O.; Brown, B.; El Tantawi, M.; Uzochukwu, B.; Ezechi, O.C.; Aly, N.M.; Abeldaño, G.F.; Ara, E.; Ayanore, M.A.; et al. Differences in COVID-19 Preventive Behavior and Food Insecurity by HIV Status in Nigeria. AIDS Behav. 2022, 26, 739–751. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  37. Crook, T.H.; Feher, E.P.; Larrabee, G.J. Assessment of memory complaint in age-associated memory impairment: The MAC-Q. Int. Psychogeriatr. 1992, 4, 165–176. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  38. Nikolaidis, A.; Paksarian, D.; Alexander, L.; Derosa, J.; Dunn, J.; Nielson, D.M.; Droney, I.; Kang, M.; Douka, I.; Bromet, E.; et al. The Coronavirus Health and Impact Survey (CRISIS) reveals reproducible correlates of pandemic-related mood states across the Atlantic. Sci. Rep. 2021, 11, 8139. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Marg, L.Z.; Heidari, O.; Taylor, J.; Marbley, C.; Scheibel, S.; Hagan, R.; Messaoudi, I.; Mendoza, M.N.; Brown, B. A multidimensional assessment of successful aging among older people living with HIV in Palm Springs, California. AIDS Res. Hum. Retroviruses 2019, 35, 1174–1180. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  40. World Bank. World Bank Country and Lending Groups. 2020. Available online: https://datahelpdesk.worldbank.org/knowledgebase/articles/906519-world-bank-country-and-lending-groups (accessed on 24 December 2022).
  41. Rosenthal, J.A. Qualitative descriptors of strength of association and effect size. J. Soc. Serv. Res. 1996, 21, 37–59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Data Novia. t-Test Essentials: Definition, Formula and Calculation: T-Test Effect Size Using Cohen’s d Measure. Available online: https://www.datanovia.com/en/lessons/t-test-effect-size-using-cohens-d-measure/#:~:text=T%2Dtest%20conventional%20effect%20sizes,if%20it%20is%20statistically%20significant (accessed on 24 December 2022).
  43. Young, C.; Hanson, C.; Craig, J.C.; Clapham, K.; Williamson, A. Psychosocial factors associated with the mental health of indigenous children living in high income countries: A systematic review. Int. J. Equity Health 2017, 16, 153. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  44. Mitchell, A.J.; Coyne, J.C. Do ultra-short screening instruments accurately detect depression in primary care? A pooled analysis and meta-analysis of 22 studies. Br. J. Gen. Pract. 2007, 57, 144–151. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  45. Leger, K.R.; Gutchess, A. Cross-Cultural Differences in Memory Specificity: Investigation of Candidate Mechanisms. J. Appl. Res. Mem. Cogn. 2021, 10, 33–43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  46. Billings, A.C.; Moos, R.H. Psychosocial theory and research on depression: An integrative framework and review. Clin. Psychol. Rev. 1982, 2, 213–237. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Schneiderman, N.; Ironson, G.; Siegel, S.D. Stress and health: Psychological, behavioral, and biological determinants. Annu. Rev. Clin. Psychol. 2005, 1, 607–628. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  48. Wilson, R.S.; Bennett, D.A. How Does Psychosocial Behavior Contribute to Cognitive Health in Old Age? Brain Sci. 2017, 7, 56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  49. Evans, I.E.M.; Martyr, A.; Collins, R.; Brayne, C.; Clare, L. Social isolation and cognitive function in later life: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J. Alzheimer’s Dis. 2018, 70, S119–S144. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  50. Read, S.; Comas-Herrera, A.; Grundy, E. Social Isolation and Memory Decline in Later-life. J. Gerontol. B Psychol. Sci. Soc. Sci. 2020, 75, 367–376. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  51. O’Luanaigh, C.; O’Connell, H.; Chin, A.V.; Hamilton, F.; Coen, R.; Walsh, C.; Walsh, J.; Caokley, D.; Cunningham, C.; Lawlor, B. Loneliness and cognition in older people: The Dublin Healthy Ageing study. Aging Ment. Health 2012, 16, 347–352. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. DiNapoli, E.A.; Wu, B.; Scogin, F. Social isolation and cognitive function in Appalachian older adults. Res. Aging 2014, 36, 161–179. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Evans, I.E.M.; Llewellyn, D.J.; Matthews, F.E.; Woods, R.T.; Brayne, C.; Clare, L.; CFAS-Wales Research Team. Social isolation, cognitive reserve, and cognition in healthy older people. PLoS ONE 2018, 13, e0201008. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  54. Hausman, H.K.; Dai, Y.; O’Shea, A.; Dominguez, V.; Fillingim, M.; Calfee, K.; Carballo, D.; Hernandez, C.; Perryman, S.; Kraft, J.N.; et al. The longitudinal impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on health behaviors, psychosocial factors, and cognitive functioning in older adults. Front. Aging Neurosci. 2022, 14, 999107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  55. Seeman, T.E.; Lusignolo, T.M.; Albert, M.; Berkman, L. Social relationships, social support, and patterns of cognitive aging in healthy, high-functioning older adults: MacArthur studies of successful aging. Health Psychol. 2001, 20, 243–255. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  56. Murayama, H.; Okubo, R.; Tabuchi, T. Increase in Social Isolation during the COVID-19 Pandemic and Its Association with Mental Health: Findings from the JACSIS 2020 Study. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 8238. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  57. Shanahan, L.; Steinhoff, A.; Bechtiger, L.; Murray, A.L.; Nivette, A.; Hepp, U.; Ribeaud, D.; Eisner, M. Emotional distress in young adults during the COVID-19 pandemic: Evidence of risk and resilience from a longitudinal cohort study. Psychol. Med. 2022, 52, 824–833. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  58. Li, Z.; Ge, J.; Feng, J.; Jiang, R.; Zhou, Q.; Xu, X.; Pan, Y.; Liu, S.; Gui, B.; Wang, Z.; et al. Less Social Support for Patients With COVID-19: Comparison With the Experience of Nurses. Front. Psychiatry 2021, 12, 554435. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. The Commonwealth Fund. More COVID-19 Fallout: Social Isolation Associated with Poor Health and Emotional Distress. 4 May 2022. Available online: https://www.commonwealthfund.org/blog/2022/more-covid-19-fallout-social-isolation-associated-poor-health-and-emotional-distress#:~:text=Feelings%20of%20isolation%20not%20only,even%20contribute%20to%20early%20mortality (accessed on 24 December 2022).
  60. Aliyu, A.A. Public health ethics and the COVID-19 pandemic. Ann. Afr. Med. 2021, 20, 157–163. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Thomas, P.A. Gender, social engagement, and limitations in late life. Soc. Sci. Med. 2011, 73, 1428–1435. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Quail, Z.; Carter, M.M.; Wei, A.; Li, X. Management of cognitive decline in Alzheimer’s disease using a non-pharmacological intervention program: A case report. Medicine 2020, 99, e20128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Hays, J.C.; Steffens, D.C.; Flint, E.P.; Bosworth, H.B.; George, L.K. Does social support buffer functional decline in elderly patients with unipolar depression? Am. J. Psychiatry 2001, 158, 1850–1855. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. National Institute of Aging. Cognitive Health Care and Older Adults [no Date]. Available online: https://www.nia.nih.gov/health/cognitive-health-and-older-adults (accessed on 17 December 2022).
Table
Table 1. Multivariable logistic regression analysis to determine factors associated with memory complaints among adults who participated in the global survey (N = 14,729).
Table 1. Multivariable logistic regression analysis to determine factors associated with memory complaints among adults who participated in the global survey (N = 14,729).
Variables Total
N = 14,729
n (%)		Memory Compliant X2Phi2AOR; 95% CI; p Value
Yes
N = 2446 (16.6)
n (%)		No
N = 12,283 (83.4)
n (%)
Economic region86.880.01
LIC348 (2.4)84 (24.1)264 (75.9)1.665; 1.273–2.177; p < 0.001
LMIC7795 (52.9)1096 (14.1)6699 (85.9)0.912; 0.813–1.023; p = 0.116
UMIC2977 (20.2)588 (19.8)2389 (80.2)1.048; 0.922–1.191; p = 0.470
HIC3609 (24.5)678 (18.8)2931 (81.2)1.000
Level of education38.550.003
None294 (2.0)79 (26.9)215 (73.1)3.114; 2.336–2.741; p < 0.001
Primary361 (2.5)85 (23.5)276 (76.5)2.102; 1.612–2.741; p < 0.001
Secondary2568 (17.5)400 (15.6)2168 (84.4)1.076; 0.947–1.223; p = 0.262
College/university11,506 (78.0)1882 (16.4)9624 (83.6)1.000
Employment status137.150.01
Retired569 (3.9)168 (29.5)401 (70.5)1.412; 1.092–1.826; p = 0.008
Student3270 (22.2)395 (12.1)2875 (87.9)1.071; 0.901–1.273; p = 0.438
Employed8578 (58.2)1552 (18.1)7026 (81.9)1.431; 1.244–1.646; p < 0.001
Unemployed2312 (15.7)331 (14.3)1981 (85.7)1.000
Age35.3 (12.8)38.8 (13.2)34.6 (12.6)-0.027 1.021; 1.017–1.026; p < 0.001
Sex at birth44.970.003
Male5507 (37.4)768 (13.9)4739 (86.1)1.000
Female9222 (62.6)1678 (18.2)7544 (81.8)1.395; 1.266–1.358; p < 0.001
HIV positive 0.22<0.0001
Yes905 (6.1)155 (17.1)750 (82.9)0.915; 0.751–1.114; p = 0.377
No 13,824 (93.9)2291 (16.6)11,533 (83.4)1.000
Socially isolated 142.120.01
Yes8934 (60.7)1747 (19.6)7187 (80.4)1.376; 1.243–1.522; p < 0.001
No5795 (39.3)699 (12.1)5096 (87.9)1.000
Social and financial support 99.350.01
Yes13,381 (90.8)2093 (15.6)11,288 (84.4)0.630; 0.548–0.723; p < 0.001
No1348 (9.2)353 (26.2)995 (73.8)1.000
Emotional distress 306.020.02
Yes7747 (52.6)1680 (21.7)6067 (78.3)2.071; 1.875–2.288; p < 0.001
No6982 (47.4)766 (11.0)6216 (89.0)1.000
SARS-CoV-19 infection 19.590.001
Yes736 (5.0)160 (22.5)576 (78.3)1.394; 1.154–1.681; p = 0.001
No13,993 (95.0)2286 (16.3)11,707 (83.7)1.000
AOR: adjusted odds ratio, CI: confidence interval; ¶: r2 used for effect size instead of Phi2.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Folayan, M.O.; Zuñiga, R.A.A.; Virtanen, J.I.; Ezechi, O.C.; Aly, N.M.; Lusher, J.; Nguyen, A.L.; El Tantawi, M. Psychosocial Factors Associated with Memory Complaints during the First Wave of the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Multi-Country Survey. Brain Sci. 2023, 13, 249. https://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci13020249

AMA Style

Folayan MO, Zuñiga RAA, Virtanen JI, Ezechi OC, Aly NM, Lusher J, Nguyen AL, El Tantawi M. Psychosocial Factors Associated with Memory Complaints during the First Wave of the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Multi-Country Survey. Brain Sciences. 2023; 13(2):249. https://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci13020249

Chicago/Turabian Style

Folayan, Morenike Oluwatoyin, Roberto Ariel Abeldaño Zuñiga, Jorma I. Virtanen, Oliver C. Ezechi, Nourhan M. Aly, Joanne Lusher, Annie L. Nguyen, and Maha El Tantawi. 2023. "Psychosocial Factors Associated with Memory Complaints during the First Wave of the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Multi-Country Survey" Brain Sciences 13, no. 2: 249. https://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci13020249

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop