%0 Journal Article
%@ 1438-8871
%I JMIR Publications
%V 23
%N 2
%P e25118
%T Efficiency and Quality of Data Collection Among Public Mental Health Surveys Conducted During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Systematic Review
%A Lin,Yu-Hsuan
%A Chen,Chung-Yen
%A Wu,Shiow-Ing
%+ Institute of Population Health Sciences, National Health Research Institutes, 35 Keyan Road, Zhunan, Miaoli County, 35053, Taiwan, 886 37 206166 ext 36383, yuhsuanlin@nhri.edu.tw
%K COVID-19
%K mental health
%K Newcastle-Ottawa Scale
%K review
%K data collection
%K survey
%K surveillance
%K literature
%K research
%D 2021
%7 10.2.2021
%9 Review
%J J Med Internet Res
%G English
%X Background: The World Health Organization has recognized the importance of assessing population-level mental health during the COVID-19 pandemic. During a global crisis such as the COVID-19 pandemic, a timely surveillance method is urgently needed to track the impact on public mental health. Objective: This brief systematic review focused on the efficiency and quality of data collection of studies conducted during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: We searched the PubMed database using the following search strings: ((COVID-19) OR (SARS-CoV-2)) AND ((Mental health) OR (psychological) OR (psychiatry)). We screened the titles, abstracts, and texts of the published papers to exclude irrelevant studies. We used the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale to evaluate the quality of each research paper. Results: Our search yielded 37 relevant mental health surveys of the general public that were conducted during the COVID-19 pandemic, as of July 10, 2020. All these public mental health surveys were cross-sectional in design, and the journals efficiently made these articles available online in an average of 18.7 (range 1-64) days from the date they were received. The average duration of recruitment periods was 9.2 (range 2-35) days, and the average sample size was 5137 (range 100-56,679). However, 73% (27/37) of the selected studies had Newcastle-Ottawa Scale scores of <3 points, which suggests that these studies are of very low quality for inclusion in a meta-analysis. Conclusions: The studies examined in this systematic review used an efficient data collection method, but there was a high risk of bias, in general, among the existing public mental health surveys. Therefore, following recommendations to avoid selection bias, or employing novel methodologies considering both a longitudinal design and high temporal resolution, would help provide a strong basis for the formation of national mental health policies. 
%M 33481754
%R 10.2196/25118
%U http://www.jmir.org/2021/2/e25118/
%U https://doi.org/10.2196/25118
%U http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33481754