Skip to main content
PLOS One logoLink to PLOS One
. 2023 Feb 3;18(2):e0281091. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0281091

Trends in maternal mental health during the COVID-19 pandemic–evidence from Zambia

Irene Falgas-Bague 1,2,3,*, Thandiwe Thembo 4, Jeanette L Kaiser 5, Davidson H Hamer 5, Nancy A Scott 5, Thandiwe Ngoma 5, Ravi Paul 4, Allison Juntunen 5, Peter C Rockers 5, Günther Fink 1
Editor: Ankit Jain6
PMCID: PMC9897519  PMID: 36735688

Abstract

The COVID-19 pandemic has increased social and emotional stressors globally, increasing mental health concerns and the risk of psychiatric illness worldwide. To date, relatively little is known about the impact of the pandemic on vulnerable groups such as women and children in low-resourced settings who generally have limited access to mental health care. We explore two rounds of data collected as part of an ongoing trial of early childhood development to assess mental health distress among mothers of children under 5-years-old living in two rural areas of Zambia during the COVID-19 pandemic. We examined the prevalence of mental health distress among a cohort of 1105 mothers using the World Health Organization’s Self-Reporting Questionnaire (SRQ-20) before the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic in August 2019 and after the first two infection waves in October-November 2021. Our primary outcome was mental health distress, defined as SRQ-20 score above 7. We analyzed social, economic and family level characteristics as factors modifying to the COVID-19 induced changes in the mental health status. At baseline, 22.5% of women were in mental health distress. The odds of mental health distress among women increased marginally over the first two waves of the pandemic (aOR1.22, CI 0.99–1.49). Women under age 30, with lower educational background, with less than three children, and those living in Eastern Province (compared to Southern Province) of Zambia, were found to be at highest risk of mental health deterioration during the pandemic. Our findings suggest that the prevalence of mental health distress is high in this population and has further worsened during COVID-19 pandemic. Public health interventions targeting mothers’ mental health in low resource settings may want to particularly focus on young mothers with limited educational attainment.

Introduction

The outbreak of COVID-19 has changed daily routines and lives of all segments of society worldwide [1]. The impact of the pandemic goes well beyond the direct consequences of the viral infection, adversely affecting the global and domestic economy, the environment, local living conditions and the incidence and course of numerous chronic conditions [25]. Measures taken by governments around the world to reduce the spread of the virus included national lockdowns, as well as limiting access to usual sources of support and income such as schools and market places [6]. These measures resulted in increased burdens of existing family struggles and are shown to have affected women more than men [7]. Even though pandemic-related stressors have affected the entire population, the impact of COVID-19 pandemic appears particularly high among women, with increases in the incidence of gender-based violence, a worsening gender gap due to lost employment and career opportunities, rising levels of anxiety and depression, and an increased risk of adverse pregnancy and birth outcomes [8,9]. For women living in low-and-middle income countries (LMICs), and more specifically in sub-Saharan Africa, these negative consequences might be even more severe due to lack of social security benefits, poorer access to care, and restricted access to income from self-employment [10,11]. In addition, many maternal and child healthcare services were de-prioritized [12] within strained health systems [13] and moved to virtual delivery platforms even when systems to support these platforms were still not in-place. This often resulted in missed appointments, late diagnoses and higher morbidity and mortality rates [14]. Despite all of these challenges, surprisingly little has been published on the actual impact of the pandemic on women’s mental health in sub-Saharan Africa.

In Zambia, similar to other LMICs, COVID-related public health measures included the closure of restaurants, companies, primary schools and colleges, as well as reduced in-person health care services [15]. Companies closed which led to layoffs of many domestic workers. Lack of strong social protection measures compromised the already impoverished household economies [1618], resulting in even more severe poverty, high food insecurity, housing instability and limited access to healthcare [19,20]. Two recent studies evaluated women’s mental health during the COVID-19 pandemic in Zambia. One showed high levels (above 40%) of stress and anxiety among health professionals [21] and a qualitative study exposed widespread perceptions of reduced access to healthcare due to lack of transportation during lockdowns and increased stress among women related to increased domestic violence events, loss of employment, childcare demands, and family isolation [22]. However, there is currently no evidence on changes in mental health distress among women in the country from before to during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Psychological distress, in general, and, especially in mothers of young children, negatively influences the usual way of thinking. It is associated with feelings such as anxiety, anger and/or sadness and affects usual behaviors by changing sleep patterns, diet, or interpersonal relationships. Overall, it leads to a reduced functioning that, for women in charge of young children, may encompass long-lasting impacts not only for themselves but also to their descendants [23,24]. Maternal and perinatal stress has been associated with negative child developmental outcomes such as psychological and behavioral dysregulation, dermatologic pathology and children’s obesity, among others [25]. Further, in sub-Saharan Africa, underlying contextual factors have been found to aggravate the risk of symptoms of depression and anxiety among women [11,26].

Here, we aim to assess mental health distress among one of the most vulnerable populations, mothers with children under 5 years old, living in two different rural and semi-urban areas of Zambia. Using data from a cohort of 1105 women who had their babies in 2019 and were re-assessed after 2 years, we aimed to describe and compare the mental health burden prior to and during the COVID-19 pandemic in rural Zambia, which is likely representative of many parts of sub-Saharan Africa.

Methods

This is a secondary analysis of data collected within a clustered randomized clinical trial (NCT03991182) assessing the impact of community-based parenting groups on child developmental outcomes. Ethical approval was granted from two academic institutions (Boston University and University of Zambia). For this study, we used data collected during the initial baseline assessment in August-September 2019 as well as during the endline visit in October-November 2021. Data were collected using SurveyCTO® Collect Software (Dobility, Inc, Cambridge, MA), downloaded and securely stored at the United States-based academic institution. Written informed consent was obtained from all the participants included in the study.

Study participants and site

Recruitment followed a multistage random sampling procedure to select a representative sample of women living within the surrounding areas of ten purposively selected health facilities from four districts across Southern and Eastern Provinces of Zambia (Nyimba, Choma, Pemba, and Kalomo districts). Trained bilingual (English and local language) interviewers visited all households with children born during the prior year in the catchment areas of these ten facilities with the support of community volunteers. At baseline, women above 15 years of age were screened for eligibility and all consenting mothers with infants up to 5 months old enrolled in the study. These same mother-child dyads were followed up at endline two years later. Pemba and Choma districts were grouped together in the last census in 2010. The districts have a population of 247,860 and a population density of 34/km2, with 68.7% of its population being rural. Kalomo district has a population of 258,570 and a population density of 17.2/km2, with 91.8% of its population living in rural areas [27,28]. Nyimba district has a population of 85,025 and a population density of 8.1/km2, with 91% of its population living in rural areas [29]. The populations of these districts have a generally low socio-economic status, with limited access to improved sources of electricity, water or sanitation, and low educational attainment. Farming and selling farming products are the primary sources of income in all three districts [30].

Measures

Our primary outcome of interest was women’s mental health distress. Women’s mental health was assessed using the Self-Reporting Questionnaire (SRQ-20), a 20-item retrospective survey with yes/no questions focusing on mental health distress in the 30 days preceding the interview [31]. The SRQ-20 was designed by the World Health Organization (WHO) and is a relatively easy-to-administer population-level screening device for common mental disorders [31] including non-specific forms of depression, anxiety and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) related symptomatology. The SRQ-20 includes both somatic items (e.g., headaches, loss of appetite, tiredness) and psychological items (e.g., feeling unhappy, nervous, and worthless). It has been widely used in LMICs [32], including in many African settings [33,34] and specifically in Lusaka, Zambia [35] showing an acceptable internal consistency [36]. SRQ-20 scores are calculated by adding all the affirmative responses. Typically, a cut-off point to distinguish “cases” of poor mental health ranges from 7 to 8 in similar populations [32,35]. For this study, we followed existing literature [35] using SRQ-20 for assessing women’s mental health in sub-Saharan African settings and used scores above 7 as a cut-off for identifying cases with potential mental health distress. Trained interviewers administrated the SRQ-20 questionnaire in English and in the two main local languages spoken in the recruiting areas. We followed a process of formal translation and back translation to ensure consistency on the use of the local languages for the assessment.

Covariates

We focused on age, educational attainment (less than primary school, primary school completion, and secondary-school completion), number of children in the respondents’ care, marital status (married vs. non-married status), and household assets as primary covariates of interest. Household assets were combined into an index using principal component analysis and categorized into quintiles [37].

Statistical analysis

We first generated descriptive statistics for the study population, and then computed the proportion of women with mental health distress by subgroup and survey round. We then pooled all data collected at baseline and endline and used logistic regression models to test for increasing mental health distress over time. The primary exposure variable of interest was an indicator variable for observations in the post-Covid period (coded to 1 for endline observations, 0 for baseline observations). To address confounding concerns due to changing sample characteristics, we estimated both adjusted and unadjusted models. We also estimated separate (stratified) trends for subgroups of interest. All analyses were conducted in Stata SE 16.

Results

There were 1105 women assessed at baseline, of whom 942 (85%) were assessed again at endline. Out of the 1105 women assessed, 947 lived in the Southern Province districts of Choma/Pemba and Kalomo, and 148 women lived in Zambia’s Eastern Province. Most women (42.8%) were under 30 years old, married (75.7%), had minimal educational background with primary school degree (52.9%), and had an average of three children (under 18 years old) under their care. Table 1 shows the percentage of women with mental health distress (SRQ>7) by subgroup and survey round. At baseline, 22.5% of women were in mental health distress. Prevalence of mental health distress was higher among mothers over 40 years of age (39.2%).

Table 1. Mental health distress by subgroup and survey round (n = 1098).

Prevalence of mental health distress (SRQ > 7)
2019 Survey 2021 Survey Relative change in %
N % N %
Age in years
< 20 309 18.4% 253 20.6% 11.4%
20–29 467 20.6% 391 26.6% 29.4%
30–39 271 27.3% 246 27.2% -0.3%
40+ 51 39.2% 49 44.9% 14.5%
Education Status
No education 70 28.6% 62 43.5% 52.4%
Primary education 579 25.7% 494 28.5% 10.9%
Secondary education 398 19.3% 340 20.6% 6.4%
Married/cohabiting 829 24.1% 726 27.0% 11.9%
Primary caregiver to
< 3 children 493 16.8% 399 23.3% 38.4%
3+ children 605 27.1% 540 28.1% 3.8%
Wealth quintile
First (lowest) 233 25.8% 182 28.6% 11.0%
Second 211 21.3% 186 26.9% 26.0%
Third 237 22.8% 215 24.2% 6.1%
Fourth 208 24.0% 181 27.6% 14.9%
Fifth (highest) 209 18.2% 175 23.4% 28.9%
Province
Eastern 157 27.4% 144 55.6% 102.8%
Southern 941 21.7% 795 20.8% -4.3%
Overall 1098 22.5% 939 26.1% 16.0%

Number of women as well as % of women with mental health distress (SRQ > 7) by survey round. Mental health scores are missing for seven women in 2019, and for three women in 2021.

As Table 1 shows, mental health distress increased in most subgroups. Between the pre- and post-COVID-19 timepoints, the largest increases in mental health distress were observed for women ages 20–29 years old (with a 29.4% increase in mental health distress), women with less than primary education degree (+52.4%), women with less than three children under their care (+38.4%), and women at the highest quintile of household assets (+28.9%). In Eastern Province, psychological distress doubled, increasing from 27.2% to 55.6%, a relative change of 102.8%.

Table 2 displays our overall trend estimates. Overall, the odds of mental health distress increased by a marginally significant 22% (OR 1.22 [CI 0.99–1.49] p = 0.085). Controlling for sociodemographic characteristics (age, educational background and marital status–Table 2, column 2) as well as site, number of children under their care, and household assets (Table 2, column 3) changed estimates only marginally.

Table 2. Unadjusted and adjusted trends over time.

SRQ > 7 Change (Post 2021)
Model 1 Model 2 Model 3
Unadjusted Adjusted for sociodemographic characteristics Adjusted for sociodemographic plus site, assets and number of children
Worsening of symptoms to mental health distress 1.216* 1.207* 1.201*
(0.993–1.490) (0.982–1.483) (0.975–1.481)

Robust confidence interval form in parentheses:

*** p<0.01,

** p<0.05,

* p<0.1.

Sociodemographic characteristics: Age, educational attainment, marital status.

In multivariate regression models, depicted in Table 3, the largest risk increases between the timepoints were found for women under 30 years of age (OR 1.29 [CI 1–1.67]), mothers with less than three children under their care (OR1.51 [CI 1.01–2.11]), and women living in Eastern Province (OR 3.79 [CI 2.278–6.319]).

Table 3. Change in mental health distress by subgroup (stratified results).

Age < 30 Age 30+ No education Primary or more < 3 children 3+ children Southern Province Eastern Province
Post (2021) 1.289* 1.039 1.934 1.156 1.507** 1.044 0.933 3.794***
(0.996–1.667) (0.723–1.493) (0.861–4.344) (0.929–1.439) (1.075–2.113) (0.799–1.363) (0.737–1.182) (2.278–6.319)
Observations 1,420 617 132 1,905 892 1,145 1,736 301

Table shows results of stratified logistic regression models. Displayed coefficients are odds ratios with 95% confidence intervals in parentheses. All models are fully adjusted (model specification 3 in Table 2)

*** p<0.01,

** p<0.05,

* p<0.1.

Discussion

To our knowledge, this is the first quantitative study examining the trajectory of mental health distress of women with children under five during COVID-19 in sub-Saharan Africa. The study strongly highlights the high pre-COVID-19 levels of mental distress among mothers with children under five living in Zambia, as well as further deterioration in mental health during the pandemic. It also identifies mothers above 40 years old, mothers with lower levels of education and mothers with more than three children under their care as subgroups with particularly high levels of mental distress during the pandemic.

Our baseline data show higher levels of mental distress among women with lower educational background. Higher education attainment has been positively associated with mental health and wellbeing [38]. This association is important for LMICs and specifically in Zambia, where, in spite of the efforts to achieve universal education, current data show that still 17% of adult women did not complete primary school [39].

Although the study design does not allow causal interpretation of our estimates, it seems likely that the COVID-19 pandemic at least contributed to the increase of mental health deterioration. The almost uniform increase in mental health distress across all population groups is consistent with recent evidence from other LMICs highlighting the high prevalence of depression and anxiety symptoms across different regions of the world during the COVID-19 pandemic [40,41].

In our study, we found that younger mothers (less than 30 years old) and women with less than three children under their care were most strongly affected by deteriorating mental health scores during the COVID-19 pandemic. Qualitative research from Zimbabwe, Malawi and Zambia and quantitative research from South Africa have highlighted food insecurity, childcare responsibilities, increases in domestic violence events, and pre-existing health conditions as main factors for mental health distress during the pandemic in this setting [22,4244]; it is possible that younger women as well as less educated women were disproportionally affected by these factors.

Increases in mental health distress during the pandemic were particularly noticeable in the Eastern region, where the proportion of women in mental health distress more than doubled over the study period. The Southern and Eastern provinces analyzed in this study differ in many respects, including socio-cultural characteristics, cultural values, and behaviors that may explain these differences. For instance, the three Southern districts in our sample have been affected by severe droughts and deforestation in the last decades leading to harder farming work and limited opportunities for self-maintenance for women compared to the Eastern province, where farming practices have been easier and women usually are able to rely on their own businesses. Another difference between the Eastern and Southern provinces is related to polygamy practice, which is predominant in the South [45]. Overall, women living in the Southern Province districts may have been exposed to other adversity in recent years that may have increased their resilience and endurance when facing acute stressors, reducing the impact of COVID-19 public health measures, as it has been reported in other settings [46,47]. Further research will be needed to better understand these trends and dynamics and to identify other potential contributing factors.

Overall, our findings suggest that increases in mental health distress were large in subgroups with lower prevalence of mental health distress before the COVID-19 pandemic. These results differ from similar studies carried out in high and low-income settings, where lower mental health status at baseline predicted further mental health deterioration during the pandemic [44,48]. Research findings prior to COVID-19 pandemic, from similar settings to our study, show that women living in more challenging environments (i.e. polygamous marriages, long droughts, or who were in charge of more kids) appear to be better prepared to cope with new harsh realities such as the COVID-19 related social measures [46,4951]. Public health authorities should consider the subgroup of young mothers as especially vulnerable to acute stress and prioritize the deployment of interventions to enhance the wellbeing of this population and, indirectly, prevent neurodevelopmental problems in future generations.

This study faces several limitations. First, the study was designed and launched before the COVID-19 outbreak, limiting the data collected on COVID-19, COVID-19-related government measures and other forms of socioeconomic impact of the pandemic. Second, our results might underestimate the true increases in mental health distress because baseline measures were taken when children were less than six months old, and some mothers were potentially still affected by postnatal depression. Similarly, other potential contributors to depression such as other co-occurring conditions affecting mothers (e.g. HIV new diagnosis) were not taken into account. Third, the pandemic and society’s responses were frequently changing during this period and having more time points of assessment could have shed greater light on the mental health effects of that dynamism. Lastly, there is only limited evidence on the validity of the SRQ-20 in these settings. Even though the SRQ-20 is likely the most used tool for measuring mental health distress in the region and is thought to be acceptable [32], studies comparing its reliability and validity within the current context are needed to increase rigorous research in low-resourced settings.

Conclusions

This study highlights the high burden of mental health distress among women with young children in Zambia, as well as the further deterioration of mental health during the pandemic. This deterioration was most pronounced among younger and less educated mothers, who likely should be prioritized when deploying mental health support interventions.

Supporting information

S1 File

(ZIP)

Data Availability

***PA AT ACCEPT: Please follow up with the authors for data available at accept. *** We will submit the full dataset to replicate the results upon acceptance of the article.

Funding Statement

IFB, RP, TT, received no specific funding for this work For NAS, DHH, JLK, AJ, PR, GF, this work was supported by Grand Challenges Canada (TTS-1802-21377 and TTS-2009-35996), and the United States Agency for International Development (USAID; grant number 72061119FA00001). The funders had no role in study design, data collection, analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of this manuscript. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not reflect positions or policies of Grand Challenges Canada or USAID.

References

  • 1.Sachs JD, Karim SA, Aknin L, Allen J, Brosbøl K, Barron GC, et al. Lancet COVID-19 Commission Statement on the occasion of the 75th session of the UN General Assembly. The Lancet. 2020;396(10257):1102–24. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)31927-9 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Maliszewska M, Mattoo A, Van Der Mensbrugghe D. The potential impact of COVID-19 on GDP and trade: A preliminary assessment. World Bank Policy Research Working Paper. 2020;(9211).
  • 3.Tandon A, Roubal T, McDonald L, Cowley P, Palu T, de Oliveira Cruz V, et al. Economic Impact of COVID-19. 2020. [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Kuderer NM, Choueiri TK, Shah DP, Shyr Y, Rubinstein SM, Rivera DR, et al. Clinical impact of COVID-19 on patients with cancer (CCC19): a cohort study. The Lancet. 2020;395(10241):1907–18. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)31187-9 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Wright A, Salazar A, Mirica M, Volk LA, Schiff GD. The invisible epidemic: neglected chronic disease management during COVID-19. Journal of general internal medicine. 2020;35(9):2816–7. doi: 10.1007/s11606-020-06025-4 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Siddiqui K. The Impact of COVID-19 on the Global economy. World. 2020. [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Burki T. The indirect impact of COVID-19 on women. The Lancet Infectious Diseases. 2020;20(8):904–5. doi: 10.1016/S1473-3099(20)30568-5 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Perzow SE, Hennessey E-MP, Hoffman MC, Grote NK, Davis EP, Hankin BL. Mental health of pregnant and postpartum women in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Journal of affective disorders reports. 2021;4:100123. doi: 10.1016/j.jadr.2021.100123 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Thibaut F, van Wijngaarden-Cremers PJ. Women’s mental health in the time of Covid-19 pandemic. Frontiers in global women’s health. 2020;1:17. doi: 10.3389/fgwh.2020.588372 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Women U. Policy brief: The impact of COVID-19 on women. New York (NY): United Nations. 2020. [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Ajayi KV, Wachira E, Bolarinwa OA, Suleman BD. Maternal mental health in Africa during the COVID-19 pandemic: a neglected global health issue. Epidemiology and Health. 2021;43. doi: 10.4178/epih.e2021078 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.John A, Eyles E, Webb RT, Okolie C, Schmidt L, Arensman E, et al. The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on self-harm and suicidal behaviour: update of living systematic review. F1000Research. 2020;9. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Moynihan R, Sanders S, Michaleff ZA, Scott AM, Clark J, To EJ, et al. Impact of COVID-19 pandemic on utilisation of healthcare services: a systematic review. BMJ open. 2021;11(3):e045343. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-045343 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Kola L. Global mental health and COVID-19. The Lancet Psychiatry. 2020;7(8):655–7. doi: 10.1016/S2215-0366(20)30235-2 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Sintema EJ. E-Learning and Smart Revision Portal for Zambian primary and secondary school learners: A digitalized virtual classroom in the COVID-19 era and beyond. Aquademia. 2020;4(2):ep20017. [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Kayula J. Covid-19 and labour law: Zambia. Italian Labour Law e-Journal. 2020;13(1S). [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Finn A, Zadel A. Monitoring COVID-19 Impacts on Households in Zambia, Report No. 1. 2020.
  • 18.Gentilini U, Almenfi MBA, Iyengar T, Okamura Y, Downes JA, Dale P, et al. Social protection and jobs responses to COVID-19. 2022. [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Paul BV, Finn A, Chaudhary S, Mayer Gukovas R, Sundaram R. COVID-19, Poverty, and Social Safety Net Response in Zambia. 2021. [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Hearst MO, Hughey L, Magoon J, Mubukwanu E, Ndonji M, Ngulube E, et al. Rapid health impact assessment of COVID-19 on families with children with disabilities living in low-income communities in Lusaka, Zambia. PloS one. 2021;16(12):e0260486. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0260486 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Mwape L, Lyambai K, Chirwa E, Mtonga M, Katowa-Mukwato P, Lloyd A. COVID-19 Pandemic through the Lenses of Nurses and Midwives in Zambia: Exploring Depression, Anxiety and Stress. Open Journal of Psychiatry. 2021;12(1):11–22. [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Nyashanu M, Karonga T, North G, Mguni M, Nyashanu W. COVID-19 lockdown and mental health: Exploring triggers of mental health distress among women in the Copperbelt province, Zambia. International Journal of Mental Health. 2021:1–14. [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Serafini RA, Powell SK, Frere JJ, Saali A, Krystal HL, Kumar V, et al. Psychological distress in the face of a pandemic: An observational study characterizing the impact of COVID-19 on immigrant outpatient mental health. Psychiatry research. 2021;295:113595. doi: 10.1016/j.psychres.2020.113595 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Alonzo D, Popescu M, Zubaroglu Ioannides P. Mental health impact of the Covid-19 pandemic on parents in high-risk, low income communities. International Journal of Social Psychiatry. 2022;68(3):575–81. doi: 10.1177/0020764021991896 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Leiferman J, Ollendick T, Kunkel D, Christie I. Mothers’ mental distress and parenting practices with infants and toddlers. Archives of women’s mental health. 2005;8(4):243–7. doi: 10.1007/s00737-005-0098-4 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Connor J, Madhavan S, Mokashi M, Amanuel H, Johnson NR, Pace LE, et al. Health risks and outcomes that disproportionately affect women during the Covid-19 pandemic: A review. Social Science & Medicine. 2020;266:113364. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2020.113364 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.2014. CSOCZCoPaH-SPAR. [16/05/2022]. Available from: http://web0.psa.gov.ph/statistics/census/population-and-housing.
  • 28.Scott NA, Kaiser JL, Vian T, Bonawitz R, Fong RM, Ngoma T, et al. Impact of maternity waiting homes on facility delivery among remote households in Zambia: protocol for a quasiexperimental, mixed-methods study. BMJ open. 2018;8(8):e022224. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2018-022224 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Census.pdf CSOCZCoPaH-EPARPAR.
  • 30.Zambia Statistics Agency—ZSA, Ministry of Health—MOH, University Teaching Hospital Virology Laboratory—UTH-VL, ICF. Zambia Demographic and Health Survey 2018. Lusaka, Zambia: ZSA, MOH, UTH-VL and ICF, 2020.
  • 31.Beusenberg M, Orley JH, Organization WH. A User’s guide to the self reporting questionnaire (SRQ. World Health Organization, 1994.
  • 32.Harpham T, Reichenheim M, Oser R, Thomas E, Hamid N, Jaswal S, et al. Measuring mental health in a cost-effective manner. Health policy and planning. 2003;18(3):344–9. doi: 10.1093/heapol/czg041 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Hanlon C, Medhin G, Alem A, Araya M, Abdulahi A, Hughes M, et al. Detecting perinatal common mental disorders in Ethiopia: validation of the self-reporting questionnaire and Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale. Journal of affective disorders. 2008;108(3):251–62. doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2007.10.023 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Pike IL, Straight B, Oesterle M, Hilton C, Lanyasunya A. Documenting the health consequences of endemic warfare in three pastoralist communities of northern Kenya: a conceptual framework. Social Science & Medicine. 2010;70(1):45–52. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2009.10.007 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Aidoo M, Harpham T. The explanatory models of mental health amongst low-income women and health care practitioners in Lusaka, Zambia. Health policy and planning. 2001;16(2):206–13. doi: 10.1093/heapol/16.2.206 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Cole SM, Tembo G. The effect of food insecurity on mental health: panel evidence from rural Zambia. Social science & medicine. 2011;73(7):1071–9. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2011.07.012 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Filmer D, Pritchett LH. Estimating Wealth Effects Without Expenditure Data—Or Tears: An Application To Educational Enrollments In States Of India. Demography. 2001;38(1):115–32. doi: 10.1353/dem.2001.0003 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Halpern-Manners A, Schnabel L, Hernandez EM, Silberg JL, Eaves LJ. The relationship between education and mental health: new evidence from a discordant twin study. Social Forces. 2016;95(1):107–31. [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Mumba B. Primary education and literacy levels among women with low educational attainment in Zambia: Analysis of secondary data. Journal of Educational Research in Developing Areas. 2020;1(1):40–9. [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Farrell T, Reagu S, Mohan S, Elmidany R, Qaddoura F, Ahmed EE, et al. The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the perinatal mental health of women. Journal of Perinatal Medicine. 2020;48(9):971–6. doi: 10.1515/jpm-2020-0415 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41.Basu A, Kim HH, Basaldua R, Choi KW, Charron L, Kelsall N, et al. A cross-national study of factors associated with women’s perinatal mental health and wellbeing during the COVID-19 pandemic. PloS one. 2021;16(4):e0249780. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0249780 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 42.Nyahunda L, Chibvura S, Tirivangasi HM. Social work practice: accounting for double injustices experienced by women under the confluence of Covid-19 pandemic and climate change impacts in Nyanga, Zimbabwe. Journal of Human Rights and Social Work. 2021;6(3):213–24. doi: 10.1007/s41134-021-00170-4 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 43.Ahmed SA, Changole J, Wangamati CK. Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on intimate partner violence in Sudan, Malawi and Kenya. Reproductive health. 2021;18(1):1–7. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 44.Abrahams Z, Lund C. Food insecurity and common mental disorders in perinatal women living in low socio-economic settings in Cape Town, South Africa during the COVID-19 pandemic: a cohort study. Global Mental Health. 2022;9:49–60. doi: 10.1017/gmh.2022.12 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 45.Gausset Q. AIDS and cultural practices in Africa: the case of the Tonga (Zambia). Social science & medicine. 2001;52(4):509–18. doi: 10.1016/s0277-9536(00)00156-8 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 46.Daoud N, Berger-Polsky A, Abu-Kaf S, Sagy S. Sense of coherence among Bedouin women in polygamous marriages compared to women in monogamous marriages. Women & Health. 2020;60(1):43–59. doi: 10.1080/03630242.2019.1610826 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 47.Saddiq A, Tolhurst R, Lalloo D, Theobald S. Promoting vulnerability or resilience to HIV? A qualitative study on polygamy in Maiduguri, Nigeria. Aids Care. 2010;22(2):146–51. doi: 10.1080/09540120903039844 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 48.Muro A, Feliu-Soler A, Castellà J. Psychological impact of COVID-19 lockdowns among adult women: the predictive role of individual differences and lockdown duration. Women & health. 2021;61(7):668–79. doi: 10.1080/03630242.2021.1954133 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 49.Antonovsky A. Unraveling the mystery of health: How people manage stress and stay well: Jossey-bass; 1987. [Google Scholar]
  • 50.Hostinar CE, Miller GE. Protective factors for youth confronting economic hardship: Current challenges and future avenues in resilience research. American Psychologist. 2019;74(6):641. doi: 10.1037/amp0000520 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 51.Kanewischer E, Mueller C, Pylkkanen M, Tunks S. Hardships & Resilience: Families in a Pandemic. The Family Journal. 2021:10664807211054182. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Decision Letter 0

Ankit Jain

Transfer Alert

This paper was transferred from another journal. As a result, its full editorial history (including decision letters, peer reviews and author responses) may not be present.

22 Nov 2022

PONE-D-22-29001Trends in maternal mental health during the COVID-19 Pandemic – Evidence from ZambiaPLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Falgas-Bague,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process. The reviewers have provided thoughtful comments which you can find below. Please revise the manuscript as recommended by the reviewers. 

Please submit your revised manuscript by Jan 06 2023 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

  • A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

  • A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

  • An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols. Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols.

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Ankit Jain, M.D.

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal Requirements:

When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.

1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at 

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and 

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf.

2. In your Data Availability statement, you have not specified where the minimal data set underlying the results described in your manuscript can be found. PLOS defines a study's minimal data set as the underlying data used to reach the conclusions drawn in the manuscript and any additional data required to replicate the reported study findings in their entirety. All PLOS journals require that the minimal data set be made fully available. For more information about our data policy, please see http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability.

Upon re-submitting your revised manuscript, please upload your study’s minimal underlying data set as either Supporting Information files or to a stable, public repository and include the relevant URLs, DOIs, or accession numbers within your revised cover letter. For a list of acceptable repositories, please see http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability#loc-recommended-repositories. Any potentially identifying patient information must be fully anonymized.

Important: If there are ethical or legal restrictions to sharing your data publicly, please explain these restrictions in detail. Please see our guidelines for more information on what we consider unacceptable restrictions to publicly sharing data: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability#loc-unacceptable-data-access-restrictions. Note that it is not acceptable for the authors to be the sole named individuals responsible for ensuring data access.

We will update your Data Availability statement to reflect the information you provide in your cover letter.

3. We note that you have stated that you will provide repository information for your data at acceptance. Should your manuscript be accepted for publication, we will hold it until you provide the relevant accession numbers or DOIs necessary to access your data. If you wish to make changes to your Data Availability statement, please describe these changes in your cover letter and we will update your Data Availability statement to reflect the information you provide.

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Partly

Reviewer #2: Yes

Reviewer #3: Yes

Reviewer #4: Yes

**********

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

Reviewer #3: I Don't Know

Reviewer #4: Yes

**********

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: No

Reviewer #3: Yes

Reviewer #4: Yes

**********

4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

Reviewer #3: Yes

Reviewer #4: Yes

**********

5. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: This study evaluates trends in maternal mental health, pre and during the COVID-19 pandemic. The authors collected two rounds of data pre-COVID-19 in august 2019 and during the COVID-19 pandemic (October – November 2021) from women who have children under 5 years old living in two rural areas of Zambia. The primary outcome of the study was mental health distress, defined as World

Health Organization’s Self-Reporting Questionnaire (SRQ-20) score above seven. The secondary outcomes were analysis of social, economic, and family-level characteristics that may have influenced maternal mental health.

The study found that at baseline (Pre pandemic) 22.5% of women were in mental health distress, with a marginal increase in mental health distress over the two waves of the pandemic. The study concluded that women under age of thirty, with lower educational background, with less than three children, and those living in Eastern Province (compared to Southern Province), Zambia, were found to be at the highest risk of mental health deterioration during the pandemic

Strengths of the study:

Large sample size

This is the first quantitative study examining the trajectory of mental health distress in women with children under five during COVID-19 in sub-Saharan Africa.

Clarification needed:

Methodology:

The study did not mention how SRQ-20 was administered. It is a self-administered rating scale. Did authors require to translate this psychometric tool in the local language spoken by people in rural Zambia?

Participant recruitment: Authors did not mention how study participants were recruited. Did this study was advertised in the local media?

I would like to know about the participation of women who could not read and write and their ability to fill out SRQ-20.

How was participants' income calculated? How did authors stratify participants based on their income source?

How was data stored?

Reviewer #2: I have read with great interest the article titled 'Trends in maternal mental health during the COVID-19 Pandemic – Evidence from Zambia'. The authors have done a good job with the manuscript. While article does discuss about the maternal mental health issues faced during COVID, the article does have limitations. The authors have addressed few limitations but do not mention of possible co-morbid condition that have been proved to be a cause of depression. The study was conducted during the pandemic but does not discuss if the increase in depression rate was because of the pandemic. The increase in depression rate cannot be considered 'marginally significant' as the Confidence interval included 1.

The limitations may be edited to include these recommendations.

Reviewer #3: Thank you for shedding light on this topic. This paper has a remarkable potential to bring this issue into the mainstream through PLOS, but I suggest some minor revisions.

The paper needs proofreading for syntax and grammar.

The introduction is well-framed and discusses mental health issues prevalent in underserved population in terms of clinical presentation and social corelates of illness.

The discussion segment in paper could benefit from comparisons and contrasting with any other similarly designed international study by elaborating on cultural/international differences, if any, or lack thereof.

Reviewer #4: Authors have done this longitudinal study to study Trends in maternal mental health during the COVID-19 pandemic. Introduction is well written highlighting the importance of topic and lack of data about maternal health in local regions of Zambia pre and during pandemic. Introduction is easy to follow and makes a good argument to study the current topic. Methods are robust, well defined and clearly explained. Results are well explained and easy to understand for the readers. Tables are helpful. Discussion is well structured, highlights the importance of results. limitations are carefully examined and explained. Overall authors have done a great work in conducting this important study and presenting it in an intelligible way.

**********

6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: No

Reviewer #3: No

Reviewer #4: No

**********

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

PLoS One. 2023 Feb 3;18(2):e0281091. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0281091.r002

Author response to Decision Letter 0


21 Dec 2022

Reviewer 1 comments:

Strengths of the study:

Large sample size

This is the first quantitative study examining the trajectory of mental health distress in women with children under five during COVID-19 in sub-Saharan Africa.

Clarification needed:

Methodology:

1.1. The study did not mention how SRQ-20 was administered. It is a self-administered rating scale. Did authors require to translate this psychometric tool in the local language spoken by people in rural Zambia?

We thank the reviewer for this comment. The SRQ-20 was administrated by trained research interviewers making sure confidentiality was saved. SRQ-20 was translated and back translated in the two main local languages (Bemba and Tonga) spoken by people in rural Zambia. Quality assurance checks were done on a random basis to ensure fidelity to the assessments. We added information about the SRQ-20 administration on page 6 of the revised text, where we write:

“Trained interviewers administrated the SRQ-20 questionnaire in English and in the two main local languages spoken in the recruiting areas. We followed a process of formal translation and back translation to ensure consistency on the use of the local languages for the assessment.”

1.2. Participant recruitment: Authors did not mention how study participants were recruited. Did this study was advertised in the local media?

Apologies for the lack of information on recruitment. We used two stage cluster-random sampling for for recruiting a representative sample of women.

In page 5 of the revised manuscript we added:

“Recruitment followed a multistage random sampling procedure to select a representative sample of women living within the surrounding areas of ten purposively selected health facilities from four districts across Southern and Eastern Provinces of Zambia (Nyimba, Choma, Pemba, and Kalomo districts). Trained bilingual (English and local language) interviewers visited all households with children born during the prior year in the catchment areas of these ten facilities with the support of community volunteers. At baseline, women above 15 years of age were screened for eligibility and all consenting mothers with infants up to 5 months old enrolled in the study. These same mother and child dyads were followed up at endline two years later.”

1.3. I would like to know about the participation of women who could not read and write and their ability to fill out SRQ-20.

Literacy was not an exclusion criteria for the participation in the study. SRQ-20 was administered by the trained interviewers in the woman’s local language.

1.4. How was participants' income calculated? How did authors stratify participants based on their income source?

We thank the reviewer for noticing this lack of consistency on the naming of our socioeconomic variables. To assess economic status of household, we collected information on a range of household assets such as quality of construction materials in their household, availability of food and household supplies as a proxy of long-term income. These assets were then analyzed using principal component analysis following the methodology originally proposed by Filmer and Pritchett (2001)[1] and then used to categorize households into five asset quintiles. To increase clarity and consistency across the manuscript, we now replace “income” with “household assets” throughout.

1.5. How was data stored?

Data was captured electronically using SurveyCTO Collect Software installed on encrypted tablets. All data was transferred via a secure server managed by SurveyCTO and only accessed through an encryption key on staff computers. Data was downloaded and stored on a secure server at Boston University. We added the following in the revised manuscript page 5:

“Data were collected using SurveyCTO® Collect Software (Dobility, Inc, Cambridge, MA) , downloaded and securely stored at the United States-based academic institution.”

Reviewer #2: I have read with great interest the article […]. The authors have done a good job with the manuscript. While article does discuss about the maternal mental health issues faced during COVID, the article does have limitations.

We thank the reviewer for the positive remarks.

2.1. The authors have addressed few limitations but a) do not mention of possible co-morbid condition that have been proved to be a cause of depression. B) The study was conducted during the pandemic but does not discuss if the increase in depression rate was because of the pandemic. C) The increase in depression rate cannot be considered 'marginally significant' as the Confidence interval included 1. The limitations may be edited to include these recommendations.

To respond to reviewer’s comments, we have expanded the limitation section.

First, we added potential other explanations of our results such as other comorbid conditions associated with depression. In page 13 of the revised manuscript we added the following:

“Similarly, other potential contributors to depression such as other co-occurring conditions affecting mothers (e.g. HIV new diagnosis) were not taken into account.”

Second, we are aware that our analysis and results cannot infer causal associations between the pandemic and depression but only show an association between the events. We have clarified this concept on the discussion as well (page 11):

“Although the study design does not allow causal interpretation of our estimates, it seems likely that COVID-19 pandemic at least contributed to the increase of mental health deterioration.”

As for the mention to marginally significant results, we agree that this term is not uniformly defined in the literature. The confidence intervals we provide are based on a p-value of 0.05; our results have a p-value smaller than <0.1 which would be considered significant by many statisticians. Since this concept is not clear we think that marginally significant is the correct expression. To emphasize the statistic result, we have added the exact p-value (P-value = 0.085) to the results section.

Reviewer #3: Thank you for shedding light on this topic. This paper has a remarkable potential to bring this issue into the mainstream through PLOS, but I suggest some minor revisions.

Thank you. We appreciate the positive remarks.

3.1. The paper needs proofreading for syntax and grammar.

To respond the reviewer comments and improve the quality of the article, the authors’ team has reviewed the full manuscript and edited it for syntax and grammar. Edits can be found in the “track changes” version of the revised manuscript.

3.2. The discussion segment in paper could benefit from comparisons and contrasting with any other similarly designed international study by elaborating on cultural/international differences, if any, or lack thereof.

There are few articles using similar designs to assess mental health among women during COVID-19 pandemic. However, we expanded the discussion section with results from similar studies in different settings and added the following (page 11 and 12):

“Qualitative research from Zimbabwe, Malawi and Zambia and quantitative research from South Africa have highlighted food insecurity, childcare responsibilities, increases in domestic violence events, and pre-existing health conditions as main factors for mental health distress during the pandemic in this setting [2-5]; it is possible that younger women as well as less educated women were disproportionally affected by these factors.

“These results differ from similar studies carried out in high and low- income settings, where lower mental health status at baseline predicted further mental health deterioration during the pandemic.[5, 6] Research findings prior to COVID-19 pandemic, from similar settings to our study, show that women living in more challenging environments (i.e. polygamous marriages, long droughts, or who were in charge of more kids) appear to be better prepared to cope with new harsh realities such as the COVID-19 related social measures.[7-10]”

Reviewer #4: Authors have done this longitudinal study to study Trends in maternal mental health during the COVID-19 pandemic. Introduction is well written highlighting the importance of topic and lack of data about maternal health in local regions of Zambia pre and during pandemic. Introduction is easy to follow and makes a good argument to study the current topic. Methods are robust, well defined and clearly explained. Results are well explained and easy to understand for the readers. Tables are helpful. Discussion is well structured, highlights the importance of results. limitations are carefully examined and explained. Overall authors have done a great work in conducting this important study and presenting it in an intelligible way.

We want to thank the reviewer for the positive comments.

References

1. Filmer D, Pritchett LH. Estimating wealth effects without expenditure data—or tears: an application to educational enrollments in states of India. Demography. 2001;38(1):115-32.

2. Nyahunda L, Chibvura S, Tirivangasi HM. Social work practice: accounting for double injustices experienced by women under the confluence of Covid-19 pandemic and climate change impacts in Nyanga, Zimbabwe. Journal of Human Rights and Social Work. 2021;6(3):213-24.

3. Nyashanu M, Karonga T, North G, Mguni M, Nyashanu W. COVID-19 lockdown and mental health: Exploring triggers of mental health distress among women in the Copperbelt province, Zambia. International Journal of Mental Health. 2021:1-14.

4. Ahmed SA, Changole J, Wangamati CK. Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on intimate partner violence in Sudan, Malawi and Kenya. Reproductive health. 2021;18(1):1-7.

5. Abrahams Z, Lund C. Food insecurity and common mental disorders in perinatal women living in low socio-economic settings in Cape Town, South Africa during the COVID-19 pandemic: a cohort study. Global Mental Health. 2022;9:49-60.

6. Muro A, Feliu-Soler A, Castellà J. Psychological impact of COVID-19 lockdowns among adult women: the predictive role of individual differences and lockdown duration. Women & health. 2021;61(7):668-79.

7. Daoud N, Berger-Polsky A, Abu-Kaf S, Sagy S. Sense of coherence among Bedouin women in polygamous marriages compared to women in monogamous marriages. Women & Health. 2020;60(1):43-59.

8. Antonovsky A. Unraveling the mystery of health: How people manage stress and stay well: Jossey-bass; 1987.

9. Hostinar CE, Miller GE. Protective factors for youth confronting economic hardship: Current challenges and future avenues in resilience research. American Psychologist. 2019;74(6):641.

10. Kanewischer E, Mueller C, Pylkkanen M, Tunks S. Hardships & Resilience: Families in a Pandemic. The Family Journal. 2021:10664807211054182.

Attachment

Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers.docx

Decision Letter 1

Ankit Jain

17 Jan 2023

Trends in maternal mental health during the COVID-19 Pandemic – Evidence from Zambia

PONE-D-22-29001R1

Dear Dr. Falgas-Bague,

We’re pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it meets all outstanding technical requirements.

Within one week, you’ll receive an e-mail detailing the required amendments. When these have been addressed, you’ll receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will be scheduled for publication.

An invoice for payment will follow shortly after the formal acceptance. To ensure an efficient process, please log into Editorial Manager at http://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/, click the 'Update My Information' link at the top of the page, and double check that your user information is up-to-date. If you have any billing related questions, please contact our Author Billing department directly at authorbilling@plos.org.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to help maximize its impact. If they’ll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team as soon as possible -- no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

Kind regards,

Ankit Jain, M.D.

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Reviewers' comments:

Acceptance letter

Ankit Jain

25 Jan 2023

PONE-D-22-29001R1

Trends in maternal mental health during the COVID-19 pandemic – Evidence from Zambia

Dear Dr. Falgas-Bague:

I'm pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now with our production department.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please let them know about your upcoming paper now to help maximize its impact. If they'll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team within the next 48 hours. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information please contact onepress@plos.org.

If we can help with anything else, please email us at plosone@plos.org.

Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE and supporting open access.

Kind regards,

PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff

on behalf of

Dr. Ankit Jain

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Associated Data

    This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

    Supplementary Materials

    S1 File

    (ZIP)

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers.docx

    Data Availability Statement

    ***PA AT ACCEPT: Please follow up with the authors for data available at accept. *** We will submit the full dataset to replicate the results upon acceptance of the article.


    Articles from PLOS ONE are provided here courtesy of PLOS

    RESOURCES