Philip R. Lee Institute for Health Policy Studies and School of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, 513 Parnassus Ave, Suite S-245, San Francisco, CA, 94143, United States.
Department of Emergency Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA.
J Gen Intern Med. 2021 Jan;36(1):170-177. doi: 10.1007/s11606-020-06328-6. Epub 2020 Oct 31.
The 2016 presidential election and the controversial policy agenda of its victor have raised concerns about how the election may have impacted mental health.
Assess how mental health changed from before to after the November 2016 election and how trends differed in states that voted for Donald Trump versus Hillary Clinton.
Pre- versus post-election study using monthly cross-sectional survey data.
A total of 499,201 adults surveyed in the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System from May 2016 to May 2017.
Residence in a state that voted for Trump versus state that voted for Clinton and the candidate's margin of victory in the state.
Self-reported days of poor mental health in the last 30 days and depression rate.
Compared to October 2016, the mean days of poor mental health in the last 30 days per adult rose from 3.35 to 3.85 in December 2016 in Clinton states (0.50 days difference, p = 0.005) but remained statistically unchanged in Trump states, moving from 3.94 to 3.78 days (- 0.17 difference, p = 0.308). The rises in poor mental health days in Clinton states were driven by older adults, women, and white individuals. The depression rate in Clinton states began rising in January 2017. A 10-percentage point higher margin of victory for Clinton in a state predicted 0.41 more days of poor mental health per adult in December 2016 on average (p = 0.001).
In states that voted for Clinton, there were 54.6 million more days of poor mental health among adults in December 2016, the month following the election, compared to October 2016. Clinicians should consider that elections could cause at least transitory increases in poor mental health and tailor patient care accordingly, especially with the 2020 election upon us.
2016 年总统选举及其获胜者有争议的政策议程引发了人们对选举如何影响心理健康的担忧。
评估自 2016 年 11 月选举以来心理健康状况的变化,以及在投票支持唐纳德·特朗普和希拉里·克林顿的州,趋势有何不同。
使用每月横断面调查数据的选举前与选举后研究。
2016 年 5 月至 2017 年 5 月期间,行为风险因素监测系统调查的共 499201 名成年人。
居住在投票支持特朗普的州与投票支持克林顿的州以及该州候选人的获胜差距。
过去 30 天内自我报告的心理健康不佳天数和抑郁率。
与 2016 年 10 月相比,在克林顿州,每个成年人过去 30 天内心理健康不佳的平均天数从 2016 年 12 月的 3.35 天增加到 3.85 天(相差 0.50 天,p=0.005),而在特朗普州则保持不变,从 3.94 天变为 3.78 天(相差 0.17 天,p=0.308)。克林顿州心理健康不佳天数的上升是由老年人、女性和白人推动的。克林顿州的抑郁率从 2017 年 1 月开始上升。在一个州,克林顿的得票率每高出 10 个百分点,就预示着 2016 年 12 月平均每个成年人的心理健康不佳天数会增加 0.41 天(p=0.001)。
在投票支持克林顿的州,与 2016 年 10 月相比,2016 年 12 月选举后的一个月,成年人中出现心理健康不佳的天数增加了 5460 万天。临床医生应考虑到选举可能至少会导致暂时的心理健康不佳增加,并相应地调整患者护理,尤其是在 2020 年选举即将到来之际。