| Literature DB >> 35463494 |
Noomen Guelmami1,2,3, Amayra Tannoubi1,2,3,4, Nasr Chalghaf1,2,4, Mouna Saidane3, Jude Kong5, Luca Puce6, Azaiez Fairouz1,2,4, Nicola Luigi Bragazzi1,6,7, Roobaea Alroobaea8.
Abstract
Background: To examine mental health during COVID-19 peaks, lockdown, and times of curfew, many studies have used the LPA/LCA person-centered approach to uncover and explore unobserved groups. However, the majority of research has focused only on negative psychological concepts to explain mental health. In this paper, we take another perspective to explore mental health. In addition, the study focuses on a period of peak decline in the COVID-19 pandemic. Objective: The present paper aim (a) empirically identifies different profiles among a cohort of Facebook users in Tunisia based on positive factors of mental health using a person-centered approach, (b) outline identified profiles across sociodemographic, internet use, and physical activity, and (c) establish predictors of these profiles.Entities:
Keywords: COVID-19; Facebook; latent profile; mental health; positive psychology; survey
Year: 2022 PMID: 35463494 PMCID: PMC9021554 DOI: 10.3389/fpsyt.2022.824134
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Psychiatry ISSN: 1664-0640 Impact factor: 5.435
Latent profile fit statistics for attribute preference model with four models and five profiles.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 10,188.05 | 10,280.32 | 0.94 | 0.98 | 0.99 | 0.01 |
| 1 | 3 | 8,638.08 | 8,764.35 | 0.94 | 0.96 | 0.98 | 0.01 |
| 1 | 4 | 8,051.22 | 8,211.48 | 0.90 | 0.91 | 0.99 | 0.01 |
| 2 | 2 | 9,960.84 | 10,082.26 | 0.92 | 0.97 | 0.98 | 0.01 |
| 2 | 3 | 8,570.54 | 8,755.09 | 0.94 | 0.96 | 0.98 | 0.01 |
| 2 | 4 | 7,884.34 | 8,132.02 | 0.92 | 0.92 | 0.98 | 0.01 |
| 3 | 2 | 7,590.89 | 7,756.01 | 0.76 | 0.90 | 0.95 | 0.01 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 3 | 4 | 7,376.37 | 7,609.48 | 0.75 | 0.75 | 0.95 | 0.01 |
| 6 | 2 | 7,371.83 | 7,638.94 | 0.70 | 0.90 | 0.92 | 0.01 |
| 6 | 3 | 7,225.43 | 7,628.51 | 0.80 | 0.90 | 0.92 | 0.01 |
| 6 | 4 | 7,099.44 | 7,638.50 | 0.72 | 0.78 | 0.95 | 0.01 |
Bold values: retained model.
Figure 1Distribution of the mean scores of scales according to the cluster.
Characteristics of the three clusters.
|
|
|
|
| ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
| |||||
| Gender | Female |
| 289 | 174 | 36 | 23,91 | 0,16 |
| % | 59,10% | 48,74% | 34,62% | ||||
| Male |
| 200 | 183 | 68 | |||
| % | 40,90% | 51,26% | 65,38% | ||||
| Socio economic level | Poor |
| 184 | 94 | 29 | 27,81 | 0,12 |
| % | 37,63% | 26,33% | 27,88% | ||||
| Medium |
| 196 | 172 | 32 | |||
| % | 40,08% | 48,18% | 30,77% | ||||
| High |
| 109 | 91 | 43 | |||
| % | 22,29% | 25,49% | 41,35% | ||||
| Academic level | Graduate |
| 307 | 218 | 71 | 1,79 | 0,043 |
| % | 62,78% | 61,06% | 68,27% | ||||
| Ungraduate |
| 182 | 139 | 33 | |||
| % | 37,22% | 38,94% | 31,73% | ||||
| Dwellings | Urbain |
| 306 | 243 | 70 | 2,98 | 0,06 |
| % | 62,58% | 68,07% | 67,31% | ||||
| Rural |
| 183 | 114 | 34 | |||
| % | 37,42% | 31,93% | 32,69% | ||||
| Internet Entertainment medium | Yes |
| 150 | 114 | 24 | 3,05 | 0,06 |
| % | 30,67% | 31,93% | 23,08% | ||||
| No |
| 339 | 243 | 80 | |||
| % | 69,33% | 68,07% | 76,92% | ||||
| IPAQ | Weak |
| 185 | 125 | 17 | 27,22 | 0,12 |
| % | 37,83% | 35,01% | 16,35% | ||||
| Moderate |
| 191 | 146 | 41 | |||
| % | 39,06% | 40,90% | 39,42% | ||||
| Vigorous |
| 113 | 86 | 46 | |||
| % | 23,11% | 24,09% | 44,23% | ||||
| Age | 31,07 ± 9,46 | 31,10 ± 9,08 | 33,14 ± 10,20 | 2,231 | 0,005 | ||
| GQ6 | 3,15 ± 0,56 | 4,03 ± 0,71 | 5,60 ± 0,52 | 732,872 | 0,61 | ||
| SWB | 2,44 ± 0,42 | 3,28 ± 0,35 | 4,41 ± 0,34 | 1,285,721 | 0,73 | ||
| EWB | 2,45 ± 0,41 | 3,20 ± 0,41 | 4,36 ± 0,35 | 1,092,456 | 0,70 | ||
| SWLS | 2,05 ± 0,48 | 3,16 ± 0,42 | 4,11 ± 0,49 | 1,156,743 | 0,71 | ||
| AHS | 2,17 ± 0,39 | 2,90 ± 0,44 | 3,79 ± 0,46 | 770,985 | 0,62 | ||
| FLS | 2,07 ± 0,40 | 3,21 ± 0,46 | 3,83 ± 0,49 | 1,139,933 | 0,71 | ||
Overall MANCOVA: Wilks' Lambda =0.38; F (6, 943) = 95.86*** (.
: p < 0.01;
: p < 0.001.
The first profile (51.47%) presents vulnerable cluster in terms of positive mental health. The second profile (37.58%) presents clusters with moderate positive mental health. The third profile (10.95%) presents people in good positive mental health.
Multinomial logistic regression for the positive mental health profiles.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
| |||||
| Cluster1 | Age | 0.01 | 2.66 | 0.98 | 0.96 | 1.00 |
| [Gender | 0.25 | 20.59 | 3.05 | 1.88 | 4.94 | |
| [Family Income | 0.28 | 7.09 | 2.11 | 1.22 | 3.67 | |
| [Family Income =Medium] | 0.27 | 7.92 | 2.16 | 1.26 | 3.70 | |
| [Academic level | 0.26 | 3.69 | 0.61 | 0.37 | 1.01 | |
| [Dwelling | 0.24 | 0.42 | 0.86 | 0.53 | 1.37 | |
| [Internetf=No] | 0.26 | 0.90 | 0.78 | 0.47 | 1.31 | |
| [IPAQg =Weak] | 0.32 | 14.64 | 3.38 | 1.81 | 6.31 | |
| [IPAQ=Moderate] | 0.26 | 2.82 | 1.55 | 0.93 | 2.57 | |
| Cluster2 | Age | 0.01 | 2.86 | 0.98 | 0.96 | 1.00 |
| [Gender | 0.25 | 7.28 | 1.97 | 1.20 | 3.22 | |
| [Family income | 0.29 | 0.89 | 1.32 | 0.74 | 2.33 | |
| [Family income=Medium] | 0.28 | 8.97 | 2.29 | 1.33 | 3.94 | |
| [Academic level | 0.26 | 2.68 | 0.65 | 0.39 | 1.09 | |
| [Dwelling | 0.25 | 0.23 | 1.13 | 0.69 | 1.83 | |
| [Internetf=No] | 0.27 | 1.46 | 0.72 | 0.43 | 1.22 | |
| [IPAQg =Weak] | 0.33 | 12.63 | 3.18 | 1.68 | 6.01 | |
| [IPAQ=Moderate] | 0.27 | 2.54 | 1.53 | 0.91 | 2.57 | |
Class 3, reference;
SE, standard error; AOR, Adjusted Odds Ratio;
age, Covariate;
male, reference;
High Family Income, reference;
ungraduated, reference;
Rural, reference;
Not uses internet for Entertainment, reference; Vigorous, reference.
p < 0.01;
p < 0.001.