Next Article in Journal
Impact Pressure Influence of Flood on Bridge Deck under Sediment Deposition Conditions: An Experimental Study
Next Article in Special Issue
Sometimes Littering Is Acceptable—Understanding and Addressing Littering Perceptions in Natural Settings
Previous Article in Journal
Utilization of Brewer’s Spent Grains and Agricultural Residues in Pig Feed Formation
Previous Article in Special Issue
Mental Health in the Post-Pandemic Period: Depression, Anxiety, and Stress in Peruvian University Students upon Return to Face-to-Face Classes
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Sustainability
Volume 15
Issue 18
10.3390/su151813776
sustainability-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

Depressive Symptoms among Slovenian Female Tertiary Students before and during the COVID-19 Pandemic: Analysis of Two Repeated Cross-Sectional Surveys in 2020 and 2021

by
Andrej Kirbiš
Department of Sociology, Faculty of Arts, University of Maribor, Koroška cesta 160, 2000 Maribor, Slovenia
Sustainability 2023, 15(18), 13776; https://doi.org/10.3390/su151813776
Submission received: 31 May 2023 / Revised: 13 September 2023 / Accepted: 14 September 2023 / Published: 15 September 2023
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Emerging Long-Term Effects of COVID-19 on Well-Being)
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
The COVID-19 pandemic has adversely affected the mental health of the general population. This holds true especially for vulnerable groups, including young people, students, and females. Our study examined cross-sectional changes in depressive symptoms from immediately before the COVID-19 pandemic (January/February 2020) to the second wave of the epidemic in Slovenia (January/February 2021) among female tertiary students. A multivariate analysis of two repeated cross-sectional surveys was performed using relatively homogeneous samples. The pooled sample included 418 young adult female students (Mage = 21.21 years). Depressed affect items were used to measure depressive symptomatology. All three feelings indicating depressed affect increased substantially and significantly from 2020 to 2021: feeling depressed (23% vs. 38%), lonely (16% vs. 43%), and sad (21% vs. 49%). In 2021, female students had almost a three-fold increase in the odds of reporting at least two out of three depressed affect symptoms compared to 2020 (19% vs. 43%; aOR 2.97; 95% CI 1.59–5.54; p < 0.001), adjusted for sociodemographic and socioeconomic confounders. Our findings suggest that Slovenian female students’ mental health deteriorated during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic. Public health professionals’ efforts to combat the pandemic’s mental health-related negative short-term and potential long-term impacts should thus focus on young people, especially on younger female students.

1. Introduction

While the COVID-19 pandemic entails large economic, social, and political costs [1,2], the health impact is particularly enormous. As of August 2023, over 770 million cumulative cases of COVID-19 and over 6.95 million deaths worldwide have been reported [3]. In addition, the COVID-19 pandemic has had a strong negative impact on the mental health outcomes of populations. Individuals are not only facing increased stress and worry concerning contracting the COVID-19 virus, but also other stressors, uncertainties, and disruptions to their everyday life. For example, cross-national evidence suggests that the public frequently experiences various COVID-19 crisis-specific stressors [4].
Individuals’ mental health may deteriorate during social shocks and uncertain circumstances. For example, a meta-analysis by Salari et al. [5] showed a relatively high prevalence of stress, anxiety, and depression in the general population (29.6, 31.9, and 33.7%, respectively) during the COVID-19 pandemic. Similarly, Shevlin and colleagues [6] observed increased anxiety, stress, and depression in the pandemic’s early stages.
Among young people, tertiary education students may have been more strongly mentally affected by the COVID-19 crisis. The loss of daily structure owing to distance learning, uncertainties regarding students’ academic achievements, future educational and professional careers, and a decline in the quality of students’ social lives are some of the negative consequences of the pandemic measures. A study in 62 countries revealed that the most frequent negative emotion expressed by students during the COVID-19 crisis was boredom (45.2%), followed by anxiety (39.8%), frustration (39.1%), and anger (25.9%) [7]. Unsurprisingly, studies show that symptoms of depression, anxiety, and distress have increased among students compared to the pre-pandemic period [8,9]. In addition, increases in one form of mental health issues (e.g., anxiety) were found to increase others (e.g., depression) [10]. These findings are in line with other research indicating comorbidity of anxiety and depression among adults [11,12] and young people [13,14]. Among students, for example, studies found correlations of 0.40–0.75 between anxiety and depression [15,16,17,18].
Studies carried out during the COVID-19 pandemic in Slovenia have shown that, compared to adults, younger Slovenians had higher odds of perceived stress, less favourable psychological functioning, and worse mental health [19,20,21,22,23]. A study comparing Slovenian students’ and adults’ mental health found that 16% of the surveyed students experienced moderate to severe generalised anxiety [22], a 1.77-fold rate compared to the non-student sample. The greater prevalence of mental health problems among Slovenian youth is consistent with pre-pandemic research showing that young people (e.g., 18–24/29-year-olds) have the highest prevalence of mental health problems and psychiatric disorders, which tend to linearly decrease with age [24,25,26].
There is some evidence that mental health has declined among Slovenian youth compared to pre-COVID-19 levels. Some pediatricians and mental health experts have reported that hospital admissions for suicidal behavior among Slovenian high school students increased by 30% in 2020, along with the need for treatment for eating disorders [27]. In addition, a study of adults found decreased subjective well-being and increased scores for depression and emotional loneliness. However, as the authors point out, the detected differences might have been due to differences in sample characteristics [28]. Some researchers have emphasized the lack of comprehensive studies on changes in mental health among students (and adults) in Slovenia [22], while existing panel studies began only after the first wave of the pandemic [23].
Although young people, especially students, may be most susceptible to the negative mental health consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic [29], another population at risk is females [22,23], for several reasons. First, females are generally a particularly at-risk group for poor mental health outcomes [30], including depression [31], especially between the ages of 15 and 25 [32]. Second, data show that during the COVID-19 outbreak, mental health in the general population of females declined the most [33]. Females in Slovenia also reported lower mental health during the COVID-19 outbreak [20]. Third, female students are at double-risk for worse mental health because of their sex and student status. Compared to male students, female college students from the U.S., for example, were more affected by the long-term psychological impact of the COVID-19 pandemic [34], reporting higher levels of distress, even when controlling for distress before the pandemic [9]. In addition, female tertiary education students worldwide are more likely to report the experience of negative emotional well-being and increased stress during the COVID-19 outbreak compared to male students [7]. Although sex differences in depression tend to appear around thirteen years of age and continue throughout females’ reproductive years [35], it should be noted that among young people, males suffer from mental health issues as well, including depressive symptoms. Young males, however, are less likely to report on these symptoms, instead applying coping strategies such as substance use, antisocial behavior and other forms of externalizing behavior [36,37]. Interestingly, however, some recent studies suggest a reversal in the sex gap among young people, with females scoring higher on externalizing behavior [38,39].
It also appears that younger students’ mental health outcomes, including depression, may be more adversely affected by the pandemic, as this group is beginning the process of working towards important life goals while simultaneously dealing with the stress of academic life. Being in a student role increases one’s vulnerability, given that students encounter distinctive worries linked to COVID-19, including sudden changes in their academic pursuits, transitioning to digital online learning, having uncertain employment, and experiencing job loss amid the pandemic [40]. This makes them more likely to experience psychological distress during crises and disruption; for example, during pandemic restrictions, which resulted in their decreased social contacts, interactions and social support [29,41,42,43,44]. In sum, given the evidence that past or current mental health conditions accentuate the negative mental health impact of the COVID-19 crisis [4], young female students may be especially vulnerable to the deleterious long-term consequences of the COVID-19 outbreak and accompanying public health measures [34].

2. Study Aim

There are currently no studies examining cross-sectional changes in mental health just before and during the COVID-19 pandemic among the Slovenian student population. Our study aimed to examine and compare an at-risk population of female tertiary education students in terms of their levels of depressed affect from January/February 2020 to January/February 2021, using purposive, relatively homogeneous samples and controlling for confounding factors. Consistent with recent research worldwide, we anticipated the worsening of female students’ mental health during this period, i.e., increased depressed affect.

3. Methods

3.1. Sample

Cross-sectional quantitative studies were performed in January/February 2020 and January/February 2021. In both cases, the sample was obtained through the online survey 1ka.si. Both samples included young people below 34 years old who resided in Slovenia at the time of the surveys, which were the two main eligibility criteria. In the first time-point, data were collected from a national study of Slovenian youth. We collected survey data from young people in Slovenia (N = 1508; Mage = 19.25; 57.6% female), initially gathered to study cultural participation and lifestyle among youths [45]. The participants comprised those attending primary school (n = 147), secondary school (n = 982), and tertiary education (n = 248), as well as those employed (n = 88) and unemployed (n = 47) youngsters who were living in Slovenia during the survey period (January and February 2020). The survey was administered across all twelve statistical regions of Slovenia. The sample was compiled by contacting randomly selected primary and secondary schools in Slovenia and disseminating an e-survey link through the project’s online social networks and the Faculty of Arts at the University of Maribor. While the national sample was not representative of the Slovenian youth population, it did encompass all primary categories of activity status and included youth from all twelve regions. For the current study, we selected a subsample of female tertiary students (n = 183; Mage = 23.26 years).
In the second time-point, January/February 2021, an online survey sample was collected among Slovenian tertiary students of both genders. Purposive, homogenous sampling was employed in surveying female tertiary students to achieve comparability across two samples and population characteristics including two time points. We asked tertiary school teachers across all three Slovenian universities to share the online survey questionnaire with their students during online lectures. In line with the aim of our paper, we again selected a subsample of female tertiary students (n = 235; Mage = 20.02 years). We note that neither of the samples analyzed in the present study was representative of Slovenian youth, so caution should be exercised regarding the generalizability of our findings.

3.2. Measures

We measured depression with the depressed affect dimension items on The Center for Epidemiologic Studies–Depression Scale (CES–D) scale, a commonly used self-rating scale to measure depressive symptomatology [46,47,48]. The original CES-D scale consists of 20 items [49,50], although various abbreviated versions have been used in the literature, including an 8-item SES-D scale [51,52]. The CES-D scale consists of several dimensions, including depressed (or negative) affect, absence of positive affect (or anhedonia), somatic complaints and interpersonal difficulties, depending on the number of items used and the population to which the scale is being administered [51,53,54].
Only items from the depressed affect dimension of the CES-D were used in our study, since these items show the strongest correlation with the full CES-D scale among young, adult and clinical populations [47,55]. Researchers can rely on the dimension of depressed affect alone to assess depressive symptoms, as “negative [depressed] affect … may be the most characteristic and consistent symptoms of depression” [55]. Furthermore, our analysis of 2020 data shows that all three depressed affect items have the strongest correlation with the full CES-D-8 scale (rho ≥ 0.75).
Three of the depressed affect symptoms found to be most prevalent among populations in previous studies [56] were included in our surveys. Furthermore, they enabled us to conduct cross-sectional comparison (all three depressed affect items were included in the 2020 and 2021 surveys). Respondents indicated the frequency of experiencing depressed affect symptoms in the previous seven days: “I felt depressed”, “I felt lonely”, “I felt sad”. (0 = rarely or none of the time (less than one day); 1 = some or a little of the time (1–2 days); 2 = occasionally or a moderate amount of time (3–4 days); 3 = most or all the time (5–7 days)).
We created a depressed affect classification based on respondents’ answers to all the three questions. Those who reported two or all three depressed feelings, each at least “occasionally or a moderate amount of time (3–4 days)” or more often, were classified as experiencing depressed affect. We dichotomized the outcome variable into 0 (did not experience depressed affect in the previous seven days) and 1 (experienced depressed affect in the previous seven days). We note that our scale did not measure the clinical assessment of depression.
Nonetheless, our three-item scale proved to be sufficiently reliable (Cronbach’s alpha2020 = 0.86 and alpha2021 = 0.83). We assessed the psychometric qualities of our three-item scale in three additional ways. First, factorial validity was confirmed, since a single-factor structure emerged when Principal Component Analysis was performed, consistent with depressed affect dimensions in previous studies [57]. Second, known-groups validity was demonstrated, with females scoring significantly higher on the three-item scale than men (p < 0.001), consistent with previous studies [47]. Third, nomological validity was assessed with correlational analyses that showed a significant correlation between our three-item scale and other constructs in accordance with established theory [47,58]. Our three-item measure proved to be positively associated with poor self-rated mental health (rho = −0.54), poor self-rated health (rho = −0.30), high anxiety (rho = 0.64), low satisfaction with life (−0.56) and high perceived stress (rho = 0.47 (p < 0.01) in the 2020 sample, all consistent with theoretical expectations. Additionally, the 2020 data enabled us to examine a correlation between the three-item and the full CES-8 scales, indicating a robust correlation (0.92; p < 0.001). Our analysis thus showed that our three-item scale measures depressed affect and is a reliable and valid indicator of depressive symptomatology.
We included several confounding variables measured in both surveys in our multivariate model: age (in years), mother’s education (1 = secondary or lower; 2 = tertiary), father’s education (1 = secondary or lower; 2 = tertiary), self-assessed family socioeconomic status (1 = low; 2 = middle; 3 = high), and size of residential settlement (1 = below 10,000 inhabitants; 2 = 10,000–100,000 inhabitants; 3 = over 100,000 inhabitants). Table 1 presents the demographic characteristics of both samples and outcome indicators.

3.3. Statistical Analyses

Descriptive statistics were used to analyze the study characteristics of both samples. The proportion and 95% confidence interval (CI) of depressed affect among female tertiary students were calculated separately for samples collected before and during the pandemic. The crude odds ratio (OR) with a 95% confidence interval (CI) was used to analyze univariate associations between the confounding and the independent variable (survey year) with the outcome variable (depressed affect). Respondents who reported two or three symptoms of depression in the last seven days, each at least “occasionally or a moderate amount of time (3–4 days)” or more often, were classified as experiencing depressed affect. Confounders in multivariate analysis included students’ age, parental education, self-assessed family socioeconomic status, and size of residential settlement, while the primary independent variable was survey year (pre- vs. during-pandemic).
All variables were included in the multivariate logistic regression models. The multivariate logistic regression analysis identified predictors (confounders and the independent variable) of depressed affect using an adjusted odds ratio (aOR) with 95% CI. The Hosmer–Lemeshow test was used as a statistical test for goodness of fit of logistic regression. Statistical significance in all analyses was computed for the probability value of <0.05. The Statistical Package for the Social Sciences Program (IBM SPSS Statistics Versions 26) was used for the analyses.

4. Results

4.1. The Proportion of Depressed Affect and Associations with Sociodemographic and Socioeconomic Characteristics (Pre-COVID-19 Sample)

Table 1 shows that all three feelings indicating depressed affect increased substantially and significantly from 2020 to 2021: feeling depressed (23% vs. 38%), lonely (16% vs. 43%), and sad (21% vs. 49%). Depressed affect was reported by 19% of students in 2020. The proportion of depressed affect symptoms within the categories of different predictors is presented in Table 2. The results of the univariate analysis showed that female students with better-educated mothers were more likely to report depressed affect (OR 2.37; 95% CI 1.06–5.29; p < 0.05). In addition, students with families from middle socioeconomic status were less likely to be depressed (OR 0.37; 95% CI 0.15–0.93; p < 0.05). The proportion of depressed affect in the sample prior to the COVID-19 pandemic did not differ according to the student’s age, father’s education, or residential settlement size (p > 0.05).

4.2. The Proportion of Depressed Affect and Associations with Sociodemographic and Socioeconomic Characteristics in the COVID-19 Sample

In 2021, depressed affect was reported by 43% of students. Its proportion within categories of different predictors is presented in Table 3. The results of the univariate analysis showed that the proportion of depressed affect did not differ according to the student’s age, mother’s and father’s education, family socioeconomic status, or residential settlement (p > 0.05).

4.3. Predictors of Depressed Affect in the Pre-COVID-19 and COVID-19 Samples

The multivariate analysis of the pooled sample (survey data from 2020 and 2021) of depressed affect, and the proportion within the categories of different predictors is presented in Table 4. The results of multivariate analysis showed that the model was significant (p < 0.001). Higher age was an independent predictor of a lower likelihood of depressed affect, although statistical significance was found only for 22-year-olds (aOR 0.37; 95% CI 0.16–0.87; p < 0.05) compared to 20-year-olds. While this may be due to the subgroup size showing statistical significance, it may also be due to 22-year-old students being in the final years of their study (many having a pause (Slovenian: “absolvent”), which might have decreased their need for in-classroom presence, and thus, distant learning might have less of a deleterious mental health effect. This, of course, needs further study in the future. The proportion of depressed affect did not differ by other confounders, including the mother’s and father’s education, family socioeconomic status and size of residential settlement (p > 0.05).
Most important, results in Table 4 indicate that in 2021, female students had an almost three-fold increase in the odds of reporting at least two out of three depressed affect symptoms compared to 2020 (aOR 2.97; 95% CI 1.59–5.54; p < 0.001), adjusted for sociodemographic and socioeconomic factors (age, parental education, self-assessed family socioeconomic status, and size of residential settlement).

5. Discussion

Our study aimed to examine trends in the levels of depressed affect from January/February 2020 to January/February 2021 among an at-risk population of female tertiary education students, using purposive, relatively homogeneous samples, and controlling for confounding factors. We focused on female students since studies show that females are more likely to suffer from the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, i.e., having reduced work hours, losing their jobs, and decreasing incomes [59]. Female students may also be more affected by the COVID-19 pandemic for several reasons, including their higher proportion of pre-existing mental health problems [30,31], especially in mid- and late-adolescence, 15 to 25 years [32].
Our study indicates that in January/February 2021, during the second epidemic wave in Slovenia, there was an almost three-fold increase (p < 0.001) in depressed affect among Slovenian female students compared to the pre-pandemic months of January/February 2020, controlling for sociodemographic and socioeconomic confounders. The deterioration in female tertiary students’ mental health in Slovenia is a novel finding, no empirical evidence on this issue has been found to date. Other prior evidence in Slovenia shows that high school students’ hospital admissions and the need for treatment for mental health issues increased in 2020 [27]. Research on adults also indicated that the pandemic increased their mental health issues, including depression [20]. Nonetheless, there is a paucity of evidence on Slovenian young people’s pre- and during-COVID-19 pandemic longitudinal and cross-sectional changes in mental health outcomes, including among at-risk groups, such as students and young females.
However, research elsewhere shows that mood disorders substantially and significantly increased across all continents from pre- to mid-pandemic in various age groups [29]. Our findings are consistent with other homogenous studies of young adults. For example, a repeated cross-sectional survey in Poland [41] assessing university students’ mental health issues in the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic found increases in depression. Similarly, a longitudinal study of first-year college students in the US [60] reported that the rates of depression increased from 21.5% to 31.7%, pre- vs. mid-pandemic, similar to our findings (among Slovenian female students in our study, depressed affect increased from 19% in 2020 to 43% in 2021).
One of the critical explanations for increased depression in 2021 compared to 2020 among Slovenian female tertiary students (and other populations) may be the experienced and perceived social isolation due to the COVID-19 restrictions, which included distance learning and decreased social contact. For example, the US college students had a 17.7 percentage point increase in depression during the pandemic if they reported feeling socially isolated mid-pandemic (and had not experienced social isolation in pre-pandemic) [60].
Giving credence to an emphasis on examining young females’ changes in depression, the above-mentioned Polish study found that young adult students (aged 18–24 years) had more symptoms of depression, anxiety, and suicidal ideation than adult students (≥25 years). In addition, both genders recorded an increase in depression as the COVID-19 pandemic progressed, although the increase was more pronounced in Polish females [41]. Similarly, a study of South African students found those aged between 18 and 24 were approximately 1.75 times more likely to report problems associated with mental health than older students. In addition, female students were 1.83 times more likely than male students to indicate problems associated with mental health, which included perceived stress, anxiety and depression [61]. Since we did not include Slovenian male students in our analysis, it may be that increases in their rates of depressed affect were lower compared to those for female students. Future studies on Slovenian youth should overcome our study’s caveat and examine gender differences in mental health outcomes.
Interestingly, there is some evidence that despite the sharp rise in depressed affect that we detected, the rates of youth mental health issues in Slovenia may have been lower during the COVID-19 pandemic compared to other high-income countries. For example, a cross-national longitudinal study during the COVID-19 pandemic reported that Slovenian youth had the lowest levels of depression compared to young people from Germany, Israel, and Poland [40]. Future studies using cross-national longitudinal data would help to elucidate cross-national differences in mental health trends before and during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Although informative, our study has several limitations that need to be mentioned. Since we employed a repeated cross-sectional study design at two time points, causal mechanisms were not addressed. Other factors unrelated to the pandemic may have increased depressive affect among Slovenian female students from 2020 to 2021. However, it seems unlikely that the three-fold increase in depressed affect could have resulted exclusively from non-pandemic-related factors. Nonetheless, longitudinal (i.e., panel) designs are needed to ascertain causal factors affecting mental health outcomes during pandemics, and to control for potential determinants and confounders, including anxiety [10], sleep quality (e.g., insomnia) [62] and lifestyles [63]. Second, our findings’ external validity (generalizability) may be low, as neither of the two primary data samples was representative of Slovenian youth or female students. Therefore, future studies should employ representative samples of various sub-populations to cross-validate our findings regarding the increase in depressed affect and to examine other mental health outcomes longitudinally. Third, future studies should examine changes in depression using established (clinical) cut-off points to detect and compare changes in severe forms of depression in at-risk groups. In addition, only female students were included in our samples to increase cross-sectional comparability based on characteristics of the sample structure, so it remains unclear whether and how the COVID-19 epidemic impacted Slovenian male students’ mental health, including depressed affect. Fifth, our study only analyzed depressed affect; future research should also examine positive dimensions of mental health. Finally, coping strategies, resilience, mastery, social support, and other potential determinants, mediators, and moderators of mental health outcomes during the COVID-19 crisis should also be examined in the future.
Our findings, combined with the literature on mental health changes due to the pandemic, indicate that the health of the young population after the COVID-19 pandemic and during future global social crises needs to be closely monitored because lockdowns, social distancing (including reductions in face-to-face social interaction), distance learning and other measures may all affect to young people’s mental health. Prior evidence suggests that the detrimental mental health consequences of the COVID-19 crisis have been (unevenly) experienced across social groups [64]. Our study is the first in Slovenia to provide empirical data confirming that mental health deteriorated significantly among a population of female students during the COVID-19 epidemic. However, due to non-representative samples, future studies must be performed to corroborate our findings further.

6. Conclusions

Our study suggests that Slovenian female students’ mental health deteriorated during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic. Public health professionals’ efforts to combat the pandemic’s negative mental health-related short-term and potential long-term impacts should focus on young people, including younger female students. Providing social support (including on campuses) and monitoring mental health symptoms among students may be crucial for addressing mental health in future pandemics and widespread social disruptions. Identifying mental health changes in vulnerable populations remains critical for preparing evidence-based public health policies, strategies, and interventions. In future crises, rapid and effective action will be needed from public health professionals and decision-makers in terms of measures and policies that address hospital care, lockdowns, social distancing, and the mental health of the population in general, particularly the at-risk groups.

Funding

This research was partly funded by the Slovenian Research Agency (ARRS), grant numbers J5-4579 and P6-0372 (B).

Institutional Review Board Statement

The study was conducted according to the guidelines of the Declaration of Helsinki. All study participants provided written informed consent to use and share their data for scientific purposes. No personally identifiable respondent information was obtained in the survey, ensuring anonymity. Subjects were informed that participation was entirely voluntary, that completion of the questionnaire indicated their consent for study participation and that all gathered data would be collectively elaborated, having no other purpose than evaluation of determinants of respondents’ attitudes. In addition, they were informed that they could withdraw from the survey at any point without penalty.

Informed Consent Statement

Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study.

Data Availability Statement

The data are available upon reasonable request to the author.

Conflicts of Interest

The author declares that he has no financial, professional, or personal conflicting interests related to this study. The funders had no role in the study’s design; the collection, analysis or interpretation of data; the writing of the manuscript; or the decision to publish the results.

References

  1. Tisdell, C.A. Economic, social and political issues raised by the COVID-19 pandemic. Econ. Anal. Policy 2020, 68, 17–28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Yamin, M. Counting the cost of COVID-19. Int. J. Inf. Technol. 2020, 12, 311–317. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. WHO. Coronavirus (COVID-19) Dashboard. Available online: https://covid19.who.int/ (accessed on 12 August 2023).
  4. Veer, I.M.; Riepenhausen, A.; Zerban, M.; Wackerhagen, C.; Puhlmann, L.M.C.; Engen, H.; Köber, G.; Bögemann, S.A.; Weermeijer, J.; Uściłko, A.; et al. Psycho-social factors associated with mental resilience in the Corona lockdown. Transl. Psychiatry 2021, 11, 67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Salari, N.; Hosseinian-Far, A.; Jalali, R.; Vaisi-Raygani, A.; Rasoulpoor, S.; Mohammadi, M.; Rasoulpoor, S.; Khaledi-Paveh, B. Prevalence of stress, anxiety, depression among the general population during the COVID-19 pandemic: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Glob. Health 2020, 16, 57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Shevlin, M.; McBride, O.; Murphy, J.; Miller, J.G.; Hartman, T.K.; Levita, L.; Mason, L.; Martinez, A.P.; McKay, R.; Stocks, T.V.A.; et al. Anxiety, depression, traumatic stress and COVID-19-related anxiety in the UK general population during the COVID-19 pandemic. BJPsych Open 2020, 6, e125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Aristovnik, A.; Keržič, D.; Ravšelj, D.; Tomaževič, N.; Umek, L. Impacts of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Life of Higher Education Students: A Global Perspective. Sustainability 2020, 12, 8438. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Huckins, J.F.; Dasilva, A.W.; Wang, W.; Hedlund, E.; Rogers, C.; Nepal, S.K.; Wu, J.; Obuchi, M.; Murphy, E.I.; Meyer, M.L.; et al. Mental Health and Behavior of College Students During the Early Phases of the COVID-19 Pandemic: Longitudinal Smartphone and Ecological Momentary Assessment Study. J. Med. Internet Res. 2020, 22, e20185. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Zimmermann, M.; Bledsoe, C.; Papa, A. Initial impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on college student mental health: A longitudinal examination of risk and protective factors. Psychiatry Res. 2021, 305, 114254. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Karakose, T. Assessing the Relationships between Internet Addiction, Depression, COVID-19-Related Fear, Anxiety, and Suspicion among Graduate Students in Educational Administration: A Structural Equation Modeling Analysis. Sustainability 2022, 14, 5356. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Kalin, N.H. The Critical Relationship Between Anxiety and Depression. Am. J. Psychiatry 2020, 177, 365–367. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Hirschfeld, R.M.A. The Comorbidity of Major Depression and Anxiety Disorders: Recognition and Management in Primary Care. Prim. Care Companion J. Clin. Psychiatry 2001, 3, 244–254. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Konac, D.; Young, K.S.; Lau, J.; Barker, E.D. Comorbidity Between Depression and Anxiety in Adolescents: Bridge Symptoms and Relevance of Risk and Protective Factors. J. Psychopathol. Behav. Assess. 2021, 43, 583–596. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Garber, J.; Weersing, V.R. Comorbidity of anxiety and depression in youth: Implications for treatment and prevention. Clin. Psychol. 2010, 17, 293–306. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. Gao, D.; Xiang, Q.; Lu, G.; Tong, J.; Jiang, W.; Yu, X.; Wang, R.; Lv, Z.; Li, D. Evaluation and analysis of anxiety and depression symptoms for college students during COVID-19 pandemic. BMC Psychol. 2022, 10, 227. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Hajduk, M.; Heretik, A.; Vaseckova, B.; Forgacova, L.; Pecenak, J. Prevalence and correlations of depression and anxiety among Slovak college students. Bratisl. Lek. Listy 2019, 120, 695–698. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Ooi, P.B.; Khor, K.S.; Tan, C.C.; Ong, D.L.T. Depression, anxiety, stress, and satisfaction with life: Moderating role of interpersonal needs among university students. Front. Public Health 2022, 10, 958884. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Shao, R.; He, P.; Ling, B.; Tan, L.; Xu, L.; Hou, Y.; Kong, L.; Yang, Y. Prevalence of depression and anxiety and correlations between depression, anxiety, family functioning, social support and coping styles among Chinese medical students. BMC Psychol. 2020, 8, 19–38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Zager Kocjan, G.; Kavčič, T.; Avsec, A. Kaj nam je povzročalo stres in slabšalo blagostanje med epidemijo COVID-19. In Psihologija Pandemije: Posamezniki in Družba v Času Koronske Krize; Lep, Ž., Hacin Beyazoglu, K., Eds.; University Press, Faculty of Arts: Ljubljana, Slovenia, 2020; pp. 117–128. ISBN 9789610603979. [Google Scholar]
  20. Avsec, A.; Zager Kocjan, G.; Kavčič, T. Kdo je bil najbolj v stresu prvi teden epidemije COVID-19. In Psihologija Pandemije: Posamezniki in Družba v Času Koronske Krize; Lep, Ž., Hacin Beyazoglu, K., Eds.; University Press, Faculty of Arts: Ljubljana, Slovenia, 2020; pp. 93–103. ISBN 9789610603979. [Google Scholar]
  21. Kavčič, T.; Avsec, A.; Zager Kocjan, G. Od začetka do konca uradne epidemije COVID-19 v Sloveniji: Stresorji, stres in blagostanje. In Psihologija Pandemije: Posamezniki in Družba v Času Koronske Krize; Lep, Ž., Hacin Beyazoglu, K., Eds.; University Press, Faculty of Arts: Ljubljana, Slovenia, 2020; pp. 23–35. ISBN 9789610603979. [Google Scholar]
  22. Podlesek, A.; Kavcic, V. Generalised Anxiety in Slovenian University Students during the COVID-19 Pandemic; Univerza v Ljubljani, Filozofska Fakulteta: Ljubljana, Slovenia, 2021; pp. 322–341. [Google Scholar]
  23. Hočevar Grom, A.; Belščak Čolakovič, A.; Rehberger, M.; Lavtar, D.; Gabrijelčič Blenkuš, M.; Jeriček Klanšček, H.; Klepec, P.; Vinko, M.; Fafangel, M.; Carli, T.; et al. Pandemija COVID-19 v Sloveniji: Izsledki Panelne Spletne Raziskave o Vplivu Pandemije na Življenje (SI-PANDA) 8. val, Ljubljana. 2021. Available online: https://www.nijz.si/sites/www.nijz.si/files/uploaded/panda_porocilo_po_8._valu_koncno_1.pdf (accessed on 12 August 2023).
  24. Kessler, R.C.; McGonagle, K.A.; Zhao, S.; Nelson, C.B.; Hughes, M.; Eshleman, S.; Wittchen, H.-U.; Kendler, K.S. Lifetime and 12-Month Prevalence of DSM-III-R Psychiatric Disorders in the United States. Results from the National Comorbidity Survey. Arch. Gen. Psychiatry 1994, 51, 8–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. de Graaf, R.; Have, M.T.; van Gool, C.; van Dorsselaer, S. Prevalence of mental disorders and trends from 1996 to 2009. Results from the Netherlands Mental Health Survey and Incidence Study-2. Soc. Psychiatry Psychiatr. Epidemiol. 2011, 47, 203–213. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Thomas, M.L.; Kaufmann, C.N.; Palmer, B.W.; Depp, C.A.; Martin, A.S.; Glorioso, D.K.; Thompson, W.K.; Jeste, D.V. Paradoxical trend for improvement in mental health with aging: A community-based study of 1546 adults aged 21–100 years. J. Clin. Psychiatry 2016, 77, 1019–1025. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Voščun, T.; Petrič Cvet, T. Psihiatrinja: Porast Hospitaliziranih Po Poskusu Samomora Med Srednješolci. Available online: https://www.24ur.com/novice/slovenija/psihiatrinja-zaradi-poskusa-samomora-hospitaliziranih-30-odstokov-vec-srednjesolcev.html (accessed on 12 August 2023).
  28. Gomboc, V.; Krohne, N.; Lavrič, M.; Podlogar, T.; Poštuvan, V.; Šedivy, N.; de Leo, D. Primerjava osamljenosti in subjektivnega blagostanja v normalnih in izrednih razmerah. In Psihologija Pandemije: Posamezniki in Družba v Času Koronske Krize; Lep, Ž., Hacin Beyazoglu, K., Eds.; University Press, Faculty of Arts: Ljubljana, Slovenia, 2020; pp. 79–89. ISBN 9789610603979. [Google Scholar]
  29. Reiriz, M.; Donoso-González, M.; Rodríguez-Expósito, B.; Uceda, S.; Beltrán-Velasco, A.I. Impact of COVID-19 Confinement on Mental Health in Youth and Vulnerable Populations: An Extensive Narrative Review. Sustainability 2023, 15, 3087. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Yu, S. Uncovering the hidden impacts of inequality on mental health: A global study. Transl. Psychiatry 2018, 8, 98. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  31. Desai, H.D.; Jann, M.W. Women’s Health Series Major Depression in Women: A Review of the Literature. J. Am. Pharm. Assoc. 2000, 40, 525–537. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Patten, S.B.; Wang, J.L.; Williams, J.V.; Currie, S.; Beck, C.A.; Maxwell, C.J.; El-Guebaly, N. Descriptive Epidemiology of Major Depression in Canada. Can. J. Psychiatry 2006, 51, 84–90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  33. Schröder, M. The Effect of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Human Well-Being, 6 May 2020. Available online: https://www.martin-schroeder.de/2020/06/05/the-effect-of-the-covid-19-pandemic-on-human-well-being/ (accessed on 12 August 2023).
  34. Browning, M.H.E.M.; Larson, L.R.; Sharaievska, I.; Rigolon, A.; McAnirlin, O.; Mullenbach, L.; Cloutier, S.; Vu, T.M.; Thomsen, J.; Reigner, N.; et al. Psychological impacts from COVID-19 among university students: Risk factors across seven states in the United States. PLoS ONE 2021, 16, e0245327. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  35. Angold, A.; Costello, E.J. Puberty and Depression. Child Adolesc. Psychiatr. Clin. N. Am. 2006, 15, 919–937. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Rosenfield, S.; Vertefuille, J.; Mcalpine, D.D. Gender Stratification and Mental Health: An Exploration of Dimensions of the Self. Soc. Psychol. Q. 2000, 63, 208. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Kalin, A. Raziskava o Vplivu Pandemije COVID-19 na Duševno Zdravje po Spolu. Available online: http://www.ozara.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/Raziskava-Covid-dus%CC%8Cevno-zdravje-spol.pdf (accessed on 19 August 2023).
  38. Bäker, N.; Schütz-Wilke, J. Behavioral Changes during the First Year of the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Longitudinal Comparison of Bullying, Cyberbullying, Externalizing Behavior Problems and Prosocial Behavior in Adolescents. COVID 2023, 3, 289–300. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Babicka-Wirkus, A.; Kozłowski, P.; Wirkus, Ł.; Stasiak, K. Internalizing and Externalizing Disorder Levels among Adolescents: Data from Poland. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2023, 20, 2752. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Benatov, J.; Ochnik, D.; Rogowska, A.M.; Arzenšek, A.; Bitenc, U.M. Prevalence and Sociodemographic Predictors of Mental Health in a Representative Sample of Young Adults from Germany, Israel, Poland, and Slovenia: A Longitudinal Study during the COVID-19 Pandemic. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 1334. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Debowska, A.; Horeczy, B.; Boduszek, D.; Dolinski, D. A repeated cross-sectional survey assessing university students’ stress, depression, anxiety, and suicidality in the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic in Poland. Psychol. Med. 2020, 52, 3744–3747. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  42. Arnett, J.J. Emerging Adulthood: The Winding Road from the Late Teens through the Twenties, 2nd ed.; Oxford University Press: New York, NY, USA, 2015; ISBN 9780199929382. [Google Scholar]
  43. Dusselier, L.; Dunn, B.; Wang, Y.; Ii, M.C.S.; Whalen, D.F. Personal, Health, Academic, and Environmental Predictors of Stress for Residence Hall Students. J. Am. Coll. Health 2005, 54, 15–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  44. Beam, C.R.; Kim, A.J. Psychological sequelae of social isolation and loneliness might be a larger problem in young adults than older adults. Psychol. Trauma 2020, 12, S58–S60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  45. Kirbiš, A. (Ed.) Kulturna Participacija Mladih v Sloveniji in Evropi; 1. natis; Kulturni Center: Maribor, Slovenia, 2021; ISBN 9789617118032. [Google Scholar]
  46. Levine, S.Z. Evaluating the seven-item Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale short-form: A longitudinal US community study. Soc. Psychiatry Psychiatr. Epidemiol. 2013, 48, 1519–1526. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Karim, J.; Weisz, R.; Bibi, Z.; Rehman, S.U. Validation of the Eight-Item Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale (CES-D) among Older Adults. Curr. Psychol. 2014, 34, 681–692. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Kliem, S.; Beller, J.; Tibubos, A.N.; Brähler, E. Normierung und Evaluation der Messinvarianz der 8-Item-Kurzform der Center of Epidemiological Studies-Depression Scale (CES-D-8). Z. Psychosom. Med. Psychother. 2020, 66, 259–271. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Radloff, L.S. The CES-D Scale: A Self-Report Depression Scale for Research in the General Population. Appl. Psychol. Meas. 1977, 1, 385–401. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Zhang, B.; Fokkema, M.; Cuijpers, P.; Li, J.; Smits, N.; Beekman, A. Measurement invariance of the center for epidemiological studies depression scale (CES-D) among Chinese and Dutch elderly. BMC Med. Res. Methodol. 2011, 11, 74. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Van de Velde, S.; Levecque, K.; Bracke, P. Measurement equivalence of the CES-D 8 in the general population in Belgium: A gender perspective. Arch. Public Health 2009, 67, 15–29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. European Social Survey. ESS Round 7 Source Questionnaire; ESS ERIC: London, UK, 2014. [Google Scholar]
  53. Fendrich, M.; Weissman, M.M.; Warner, V. Screening for depressive disorder in children and adolescents: Validating the center for epidemiologic studees depression scale for children. Am. J. Epidemiol. 1990, 131, 538–551. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Armenta, B.E.; Hartshorn, K.J.S.; Whitbeck, L.B.; Crawford, D.M.; Hoyt, D.R. A longitudinal examination of the measurement properties and predictive utility of the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale among North American Indigenous adolescents. Psychol. Assess. 2014, 26, 1347–1355. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  55. Carleton, R.N.; Thibodeau, M.A.; Teale, M.J.N.; Welch, P.G.; Abrams, M.P.; Robinson, T.; Asmundson, G.J.G. The Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale: A Review with a Theoretical and Empirical Examination of Item Content and Factor Structure. PLoS ONE 2013, 8, e58067. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  56. Hybels, C.F.; Blazer, D.G.; Pieper, C.F. Toward a threshold for subthreshold depression: An analysis of correlates of depression by severity of symptoms using data from an elderly community sample. Gerontologist 2001, 41, 357–365. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  57. Perreira, K.M.; Deeb-Sossa, N.; Harris, K.M.; Bollen, K. What Are We Measuring? An Evaluation of the CES-D Across Race/Ethnicity and Immigrant Generation. Soc. Forces 2005, 83, 1567–1601. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Cronbach, L.J.; Meehl, P.E. Construct validity in psychological tests. Psychol. Bull. 1955, 52, 281–302. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Adams-Prassl, A.; Boneva, T.; Golin, M.; Rauh, C. Inequality in the Impact of the Coronavirus Shock: New Survey Evidence for the UK. 2020. Available online: https://api.repository.cam.ac.uk/server/api/core/bitstreams/ba767a6e-83ff-49ee-b5cf-74520a1b0b3c/content (accessed on 9 September 2023).
  60. Fruehwirth, J.C.; Biswas, S.; Perreira, K.M. The COVID-19 pandemic and mental health of first-year college students: Examining the effect of COVID-19 stressors using longitudinal data. PLoS ONE 2021, 16, e0247999. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Ojo, E.O.; Onwuegbuzie, A.J. University Life in an Era of Disruption of COVID-19: A Meta-Methods and Multi-Mixed Methods Research Study of Perceptions and Attitudes of South African Students. Int. J. Mult. Res. Approaches 2020, 12, 20–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Morin, C.M.; Bjorvatn, B.; Chung, F.; Holzinger, B.; Partinen, M.; Penzel, T.; Ivers, H.; Wing, Y.K.; Chan, N.Y.; Merikanto, I.; et al. Insomnia, anxiety, and depression during the COVID-19 pandemic: An international collaborative study. Sleep Med. 2021, 87, 38–45. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Skurvydas, A.; Lisinskiene, A.; Majauskiene, D.; Valanciene, D.; Dadeliene, R.; Istomina, N.; Sarkauskiene, A. The Effect of COVID-19 Restrictions on Changes in Moderate-to-Vigorous Physical Activity Was “A Double-Edged Sword”: It Improved for Some and Worsened for Others. Sustainability 2022, 14, 10091. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Witteveen, D.; Velthorst, E. Economic hardship and mental health complaints during COVID-19. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2020, 117, 27277–27284. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Table 1. Demographic characteristics of the two samples.
Table 1. Demographic characteristics of the two samples.
Female Population Characteristics Sample 2020 (N = 183)
(%)		 Sample 2021 (N = 235)
(%)
Age
≤20 13 72
21 16 13
22 14 10
23–25 56 5
Mother’s education
Secondary or lower 46 45
Tertiary 54 55
Father’s education
Secondary or lower 59 54
Tertiary 42 46
Family socioeconomic status
Low 23 15
Middle 46 52
High 31 33
Residential settlement size (inhabitants)
Below 10,000 34 53
10,000–100,000 12 27
100,000+ 54 20
Depressed affect (Yes) * 19 43
Felt depressed.** 23 38
Felt lonely.** 16 43
Felt sad.** 21 49
Notes: * See the Measures section for our categorization of depressed affect. ** Occasionally or a moderate amount of time (3–4 days) or more often in the last seven days.
Table 2. The proportion of depressed affect and associations with sociodemographic and socioeconomic characteristics in the pre-COVID-19 sample.
Table 2. The proportion of depressed affect and associations with sociodemographic and socioeconomic characteristics in the pre-COVID-19 sample.
Female Population Characteristics The Proportion of Depressed Affect (%) 95% CI Crude OR 95% CI
Students 19 13–24
Age
≤20 17 1–33 - -
21 20 5–35 1.25 0.31–5.06
22 08 0–19 0.42 0.07–2.52
23–25 21 13–29 1.36 0.42–4.39
Mother’s education
Secondary or lower 12 5–19 - -
Tertiary 24 16–33 2.37 * 1.06–5.29
Father’s education
Secondary or lower 17 10–24 - -
Tertiary 21 12–30 1.32 0.62–2.79
Family socioeconomic status
Low 29 14–43 -
Middle 13 6–20 0.37 * 0.15–0.93
High 20 9–30 0.61 0.24–1.56
Residential settlement size (inhabitants)
Below 10,000 16 7–26 - -
10,000–100,000 18 1–36 1.16 0.32–4.15
100,000+ 20 12–28 1.32 0.57–3.04
Notes: Significant findings (p < 0.05) are marked with (*). Abbreviations: CI = confidence interval; OR = odds ratio.
Table 3. The proportion of depressed affect and associations with sociodemographic and socioeconomic characteristics in the COVID-19 sample.
Table 3. The proportion of depressed affect and associations with sociodemographic and socioeconomic characteristics in the COVID-19 sample.
Female Population Characteristics The Proportion of Depressed Affect (%) 95% CI Crude OR 95% CI
Students 43 37–49
Age
≤20 47 40–55 - -
21 39 21–57 0.70 0.32–1.54
22 26 7–46 0.39 0.15–1.05
23–25 25 0–54 0.37 0.10–1.42
Mother’s education
Secondary or lower 48 38–58 - -
Tertiary 39 30–47 0.68 0.41–1.15
Father’s education
Secondary or lower 41 33–50 - -
Tertiary 45 35–54 1.16 0.69–1.95
Family socioeconomic status
Low 46 28–63 -
Middle 43 34–52 0.88 0.41–1.88
High 42 31–54 0.87 0.39–1.94
Residential settlement size (inhabitants)
Below 10,000 43 34–52 - -
10,000–100,000 45 33–58 1.09 0.59–2.00
100,000+ 39 24–54 0.85 0.42–1.69
Notes: Abbreviations: CI = confidence interval; OR = odds ratio.
Table 4. Predictors of depressed affect in the pre-COVID-19 and COVID-19 samples.
Table 4. Predictors of depressed affect in the pre-COVID-19 and COVID-19 samples.
Adjusted OR 95% CI
Age
≤20 (ref.) - -
21 0.79 0.41–1.55
22 0.37 * 0.16–0.87
23–25 0.81 0.40–1.64
Mother’s education
Secondary or lower (ref.) - -
Tertiary 0.98 0.61–1.58
Father’s education
Secondary or lower (ref.) - -
Tertiary 1.22 0.76–1.95
Family socioeconomic status
Low (ref.) -
Middle 0.69 0.38–1.25
High 0.74 0.38–1.43
Residential settlement size (inhabitants)
Below 10,000 (ref.) - -
10,000–100,000 1.06 0.60–1.85
100,000+ 1.05 0.61–1.79
Independent variable
Time
2020 (ref.)
2021 2.97 * 1.59–5.54
Nagelkerke R Squared 10.5%
Notes: Significant findings (p < 0.05) are marked with (*). Abbreviations: CI = confidence interval.
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

Kirbiš, A. Depressive Symptoms among Slovenian Female Tertiary Students before and during the COVID-19 Pandemic: Analysis of Two Repeated Cross-Sectional Surveys in 2020 and 2021. Sustainability 2023, 15, 13776. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151813776

AMA Style

Kirbiš A. Depressive Symptoms among Slovenian Female Tertiary Students before and during the COVID-19 Pandemic: Analysis of Two Repeated Cross-Sectional Surveys in 2020 and 2021. Sustainability. 2023; 15(18):13776. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151813776

Chicago/Turabian Style

Kirbiš, Andrej. 2023. "Depressive Symptoms among Slovenian Female Tertiary Students before and during the COVID-19 Pandemic: Analysis of Two Repeated Cross-Sectional Surveys in 2020 and 2021" Sustainability 15, no. 18: 13776. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151813776

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