Next Article in Journal
Exploring South Korean Elementary School Classroom Teachers’ Beliefs and Practices in Physical Education
Previous Article in Journal
Psychological Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Dentists in Latin America’s Epicenter: São Paulo, Brazil
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
IJERPH
Volume 19
Issue 22
10.3390/ijerph192215032
ijerph-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

Incident and Recurrent Depression among Adults Aged 50 Years and Older during the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Longitudinal Analysis of the Canadian Longitudinal Study on Aging

by
Andie MacNeil
1,2,
Sapriya Birk
3,
Paul J. Villeneuve
3,4,
Ying Jiang
5,
Margaret de Groh
5 and
Esme Fuller-Thomson
1,2,*
1
Factor-Inwentash Faculty of Social Work, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON M5S 1V4, Canada
2
Institute for Life Course and Aging, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON M5S 1V4, Canada
3
Department of Neuroscience, Carleton University, Ottawa, ON K1S 5B6, Canada
4
CHAIM Research Centre, Carleton University, Ottawa, ON K1S 5B6, Canada
5
Applied Research Division, Centre for Surveillance and Applied Research, Public Health Agency of Canada, Ottawa, ON K1A 0K9, Canada
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19(22), 15032; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph192215032
Submission received: 24 September 2022 / Revised: 24 October 2022 / Accepted: 26 October 2022 / Published: 15 November 2022
(This article belongs to the Section Mental Health)
Browse Figure
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
The COVID-19 pandemic and accompanying public health measures have exacerbated many risk factors for depression in older adulthood. The objectives of the current study are: (1) to determine the risk of incident and recurrent depression during the COVID-19 pandemic among those with, or without, a history of depression; and (2) to identify factors that were predictive of depression in these two groups. The study population included 22,622 participants of the Canadian Longitudinal Study on Aging who provided data at baseline (2011–2015), follow-up (2015–2018), and twice during the pandemic (April–May 2020, September–December 2020). The Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale (CES-D-10) was used to classify individuals with depression. Logistic regression was used to estimate the odds of depression during COVID across a series of risk factors. Individuals with a history of depression had four times the risk of depression during the pandemic when compared to those without a history of depression, even after controlling for relevant covariates. Other factors associated with depression during the pandemic include being female, having fewer savings, and experiencing COVID-19 related stressors, such as health stressors, difficulties accessing resources, and family conflict. Clinicians working with older adults should consider interventions to support high-risk groups, such as those with recurrent depression.

1. Introduction

The COVID-19 pandemic and accompanying public health measures adopted to mitigate viral spread have profoundly impacted the mental health of individuals [1,2]. It has been suggested that the physical distancing and sustained shelter-in-place policies produced a “double pandemic” of COVID-19 and social isolation [3]. While older adults, aged 65 and above, generally report lower levels of depression than their younger counterparts [4,5], they have been particularly vulnerable to these policies. This is due to a number of factors, including increased risks of COVID-19 related morbidity and mortality [6], as well as more societal pressure relative to those of younger ages to strictly adhere to physical distancing guidelines [7,8]. Moreover, older adults are recognized to face greater challenges than younger adults with the use of technology that can enable them to stay better connected with loved ones and thereby lessening the harms from extended periods of isolation [9]. Emerging research has already indicated that older adults were more prone to social and loneliness during the COVID-19 pandemic when compared to younger age-groups [10,11].
Of particular concern are the deleterious effects that increases in loneliness may have on rates of depression among older adults [12,13]. Research conducted early in the pandemic among Canadian adults, 45 to 70 years of age, found that 71.0% of women and 67.4% of men reported feeling lonely in the preceding week [14]. There is extensive evidence that loneliness in later life is associated with both incident and recurrent depression [15,16,17], highlighting concern that the pandemic may contribute to incident depression among those with no history of the disorder, as well as recurrent episodes of depression among those with a lifetime history of depression. Older adults with a history of depression represent a particularly vulnerable subpopulation, as a previous history of depression is a leading risk factor for depression in later life [18,19,20,21].
There are several other sociodemographic risk factors for depression in older adulthood that have been impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic, including low socio-economic status at the individual level [22,23] and the neighbourhood level [24], multimorbidity [25], and being female [23,26]. Low-income individuals and communities have experienced disproportionate COVID-19 related morbidity and mortality, exacerbating psychological stress among those with low socioeconomic status [27,28]. Furthermore, older adults with multimorbidity have experienced significant increases in psychological distress early in the pandemic [29], likely due to the increased risk of severe-COVID-19 related outcomes, coupled with greater pressure to adhere to physical distancing measures to mitigate infection risk. In addition, older women have been found to have a higher risk of experiencing loneliness and social isolation during the COVID-19 pandemic compared to older men [14], suggesting that their vulnerability to depression may be heightened during the pandemic. Collectively, these factors emphasize the urgent need to examine the mental health of older adults during the COVID-19 pandemic, with particular consideration for these high-risk populations.
To date, much of the research on the mental health outcomes of the COVID-19 pandemic has relied on findings from cross-sectional studies. Cross-sectional studies are susceptible to participation bias and are limited in modelling pathways to depression. This makes it difficult to differentiate between those with incident and recurrent depression, and also limits examination on the effects of pre-pandemic factors on depression during the pandemic. To better understand the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on depression among older adults and to address existing research gaps, herein we use a large Canadian longitudinal study of adults aged 50 years and older (hereafter older adults) to achieve the following objectives: (1) to determine the risk of incident and recurrent depression during the COVID-19 pandemic among those with, or without, a previous history of depression and (2) to identify factors that were predictive of developing depression during the pandemic in these same two groups of individuals. Based on the literature discussed above, we hypothesize that older adults with a history of depression are more vulnerable to experiencing depression during the COVID-19 pandemic relative to similarly aged adults with no history of depression. We also hypothesize that those who are female and are of lower socioeconomic status are more vulnerable to incident and recurrent depression during the COVID-19 pandemic.

2. Methods

2.1. Data Source

The Canadian Longitudinal Study on Aging (CLSA) is a national, longitudinal study designed to explore aging among Canadians. The CLSA consists of a random sample of 51,338 men and women recruited from predominantly urban centers of the 10 Canadian provinces, who were aged 45–85 years old at enrollment, were able to complete the questionnaires in English or French, were physically and cognitively able to participate independently, and provided informed consent for participation [30,31]. Residents of the Canadian territories and remote regions, individuals living on Federal or provincial First Nations reserves/settlements, full-time members of the Canadian Armed forces, and individuals who were institutionalized (including long-term care) were excluded from the CLSA.
The CLSA follows participants for 20 years, or until death, with data collection occurring every three years following a baseline questionnaire [31]. There are two cohorts within the CLSA: the comprehensive and tracking. Those in the comprehensive cohort lived within 25–50 km of one of the 11 data collection sites (DCS) located in seven provinces at baseline. The CLSA’s DCS are located in Victoria, Vancouver, Surrey, Calgary, Winnipeg, Hamilton, Ottawa, Montréal, Sherbrooke, Halifax, and St. John’s. They provided responses to the questionnaires through in-person home interviews and additional detailed information was collected during a DCS visit through physical examinations and biological specimens (blood and urine). Those in the tracking cohort lived within or near urban centers of the 10 provinces, and questionnaires were administered computer-assisted telephone interviews (CATI). Detailed descriptions on the CLSA design are published elsewhere [31].
To date, the CLSA has collected data from four waves of questionnaires: the baseline (2012–2014), follow-up 1 (2015–2018), COVID-19 baseline (hereafter Spring 2020), and COVID-19 exit (hereafter Autumn 2020). The baseline and follow-up 1 questionnaires collected data on demographics, physical and mental health, economic status, lifestyle and behaviour, and healthcare service utilization. The Spring 2020 and Autumn 2020 questionnaires were launched to investigate the effects of the pandemic on Canadian older adults and were completed through telephone and online surveys. These questionnaires asked additional questions regarding COVID-19 symptoms, the effect of COVID-19 on mental health, workplace changes due to COVID-19, and COVID-19 related behaviours (e.g., handwashing).

2.2. Sample

This current paper focused on the outcome of depression during the COVID-19 pandemic among those with and without a history of depression. Figure 1 demonstrates the sampling strategy for this study. The 23,974 participants who responded to all four CLSA questionnaires were initially considered for inclusion. To identify those with a history of depression prior to COVID-19, participants needed to have screened positive for depression according to the Center for Epidemiological Studies-Depression scale (CES-D-10) [32] at baseline or follow-up 1 or responded affirmatively to the question “Has a doctor ever told you that you suffer from clinical depression?” at baseline or follow-up 1. There were 302 participants who were excluded due to missing responses to some of these questions. Lastly, 1050 participants with an incomplete CES-D-10 score at baseline, follow-up 1, Spring 2020, or Autumn 2020 were excluded. This resulted in a final sample size of 22,622.

2.3. Measures

2.3.1. Outcome: Depression

Depression was measured using the short form of the Center for Epidemiological Studies—Depression (CES-D-10) scale [32,33] in all four questionnaires. The CES-D-10 is composed of ten questions asking participants to identify the frequency of feelings such as depression, loneliness, restlessness, happiness, and hopefulness. Responses to these questions are scored and summed to give a final score between 0 and 30. Depression was identified if the CES-D-10 score was equal to or greater than 10.
History of depression was identified using participants’ responses to the CES-D-10 and clinical depression diagnosis question. Participants were identified as having a history of depression if they screened positive for depression according to CES-D-10 at baseline or follow-up 1 and/or they responded affirmatively to the question “Has a doctor ever told you that you suffer from clinical depression?” at baseline or follow-up 1. Otherwise, they were considered as not having a history of depression. Those with a history of depression were further categorized into having recent or distant depression. Recent depression was defined as having a CES-D-10 score ≥ 10 at follow-up 1. Those with a history of depression that did not have a CES-D-10 score ≥ 10 at follow-up 1 were classified as having a distant history of depression.

2.3.2. Covariates

Covariates included sociodemographic factors, health-related variables, social experiences and factors, and COVID-19 related stressors. Demographic factors included sex, age at COVID-19 baseline, marital status (single, married/common-law, separated/divorced/widowed), and immigrant status (born in Canada vs. not born in Canada). Socioeconomic status and wealth were measured by education, income, savings, and home ownership. The highest level of education achieved was categorized as less than secondary school, secondary school, some post-secondary education (trade school, non-university certificate, or university certificate below Bachelor’s), and post-secondary degree (Bachelor’s or degree above Bachelor’s). Total household income was defined as the income received by all household members, from all sources, in the past 12 months and was categorized as less than $20,000, $20,000–$49,999, $50,000–$99,999, $100,000-$149,999, and $150,000 or more. Participants were also asked about the total value of their savings and investments. This was categorized as less than $50,000, $50,000 to less than $100,000, $100,000 to less than $1 million, and $1 million or more. Home ownership was categorized as renting, own—with mortgage, own—mortgage paid off completely, own—mortgage status unspecified, and other. A subjective measure of wealth was also included. Participants were asked to indicate whether they felt that their income adequately satisfied their basic needs (adequate vs. inadequate).
Variables related to health included body mass index (BMI), chronic pain, and multimorbidity. BMI was categorized using the classification scheme used by the World Health Organization as underweight/normal weight (BMI < 25.0), overweight (BMI = 25.0–29.9), and obese (BMI ≥ 30.0). Chronic pain was identified by participants’ response to the question “Are you usually free of pain or discomfort” and was categorized into yes (usually have pain) and no (usually free of pain). Multimorbidity was categorized into those with no chronic conditions, those with one chronic condition, and those with two or more chronic conditions. These conditions included: included diabetes, heart disease (including congestive heart failure), peripheral vascular disease, memory problems, dementia or Alzheimer’s, multiple sclerosis, seizure disorders or epilepsy, migraine headaches, intestinal or stomach ulcers, and bowel disorders (including Crohn’s disease, ulcerative colitis, and irritable bowel syndrome).
Aspects of social support and social experiences were also briefly captured. Childhood adversities were measured and categorized as less than three and three or more of the following adverse childhood experiences: family history of mental/psychiatric illness, death or serious illness of parent/primary caregiver, and divorce or separation of parents before the age of 18. Experiences of any of the following before age 16 were also counted as a childhood adversity: physical, sexual, or verbal abuse, witness of verbal or physical abuse in the household, interaction with police or child protective services, and basic needs not being taken care of by parents, step-parents, or guardians. Participants were also asked if they had a household pet (yes vs. no). Lastly, a subjective measure of social inequality was measured by asking participants to rate where they think they stand in their community on a scale of 1 to 10, with 10 indicating the highest standing. Ratings were categorized as low (1–5), middle (6–7), and high (8–10).
At the Spring 2020 survey, participants were asked about their status as an essential worker (yes/no) and how many people they currently live with. A variable for living alone (yes/no) was created from responses to this question. Stressors related to COVID-19 were measured at the Autumn 2020 questionnaire. Participants were given twelve experiences/stressors and asked, “Which of the following stressors/experiences have you experienced during the COVID-19 pandemic?” The twelve stressors were categorized into five categories and participants were identified as having experienced that category of stressors if they responded yes to at least one experience. If they responded no to all experiences in a category, they were identified as not having that stressor. The five categories and corresponding stressors are listed: health stressors (“You were ill”, “People close to you were ill”, and/or “Death of a person close to you”), resource access (“Loss of income” and/or “Unable to access necessary supplies or food”), family conflict (Increased verbal or physical conflict” and/or “Breakdown in family/marital relationships”), other family issues (“Separation from family”, “Increased time caregiving”, and/or “Unable to care for people who require assistance due to health condition or limitation”), and healthcare (“Unable to access my usual healthcare” and/or “Unable to get my usual prescription medications and treatments”). Three measures of loneliness were also captured at Autumn 2020. Participants were asked how often they felt (1) that they lack companionship, (2) left out, and (3) isolated from others. They could respond “hardly ever”, “some of the time”, or “often”. Responses to these questions were coded into yes/no. If they responded “some of the time” or “often”, they were categorized as yes. If they responded “hardly ever”, they were categorized as no.

2.4. Statistical Analyses

All data management and statistical analyses were conducted using SPSS version 28.0.1.0 (142). Frequencies and percentages are reported categorically for all covariates. We tested for differences in the frequency distribution for these variables between those with and without a history of depression using the chi-square ( χ 2 ) statistic. Crude and adjusted odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated in logistic regression models, adjusted for age, sex, and marital status, and to determine which factors predict depression at COVID-19 among those with and without a history of depression, respectively.
Unconditional logistic regression was used to estimate the odds of having depression at Autumn 2020 for those with a history of depression, relative to those with no history. We repeated these analyses stratified by sex. In these models, depression at Autumn 2020 was a dichotomous outcome where the prevalence of depression was defined as having a CES-D 10 score of ten or higher. Those with scores less than ten were classified as not having depression at Autumn 2020. Separate models were fit to derive odds ratio for those with any history of depression, distant history of depression, and recent history of depression. Both crude and adjusted odds ratios were calculated. The adjusted model included the following categorical variables: age, sex, value of savings, marital status, chronic pain, experience of childhood adversity, loneliness (feeling left out), living alone during COVID-19, and COVD-19 related stressors. The selection of the adjustment factor was determined based on crude ORs associated with the outcome (depressed at Autumn 2020). However, to avoid over-adjusting, researchers used their discretion in choosing variables for inclusion in the adjusted model. For example, only one measure of wealth was included in the adjusted model (value of savings and investments). This covariate had the strongest crude association with depression at Autumn 2020 compared to the other wealth-related variables (i.e., household income, dwelling ownership, perception of income satisfying basic needs, etc.). Missing categories were not included in the model. Statistical significance was determined at a p-value < 0.05.

3. Results

3.1. Demographic Characteristics

The history of depression varied among socio-demographic characteristics (Table 1). Women were more likely to report a history of depression when compared to men (32.4% vs. 20.9%; p < 0.05). The history of depression was inversely related to household income, attained education, and other measures of wealth. In contrast, self-reported depression was lowed among those who were married or in common-law relationships. Those with other comorbid health conditions were also more likely to report a history of depression. Specifically, the history of depression among those with no chronic health conditions, one chronic health condition, or 2 or more chronic health conditions was 21.1%, 29.0% and 41.0%, respectively. Interestingly, those with a household pet were also slightly more likely to have a history of depression.
Similar descriptive analyses are presented for possible risk factors for depression during COVID-19 (Table 2). Nearly one quarter of all participants reported living alone, and they had a higher prevalence of depression when compared to those who did not (36.3% vs. 23.8%). There were no differences in the prevalence of depression among those who were essential workers compared to those who were not.

3.2. Depression during COVID-19 Pandemic

In this sample, 12.9% of participants with no history of depression developed depression during the COVID-19 pandemic. Comparatively, 45.2% of participants with a history of depression had depression at the time of their Autumn 2020 questionnaire. Over half of participants (58.2%) with a recent history of depression were depressed at their Autumn 2020 questionnaire.
Table 3 presents unadjusted and adjusted ORs with 95% CIs separately for those with and without a history of depression. Unadjusted ORs were used to help identify which factors to include in the logistic regression models. Adjusted ORs (aORs) were generated for each covariate to determine what factors may predict or contribute to the development of depression at the Autumn 2020 questionnaire. Our results indicate that women are more likely to have depression at Autumn 2020 for both those with a history of depression (aOR = 1.31 [1.18–1.46]) and without (aOR = 1.50 [1.36–1.65]). Among those without history of depression, the youngest (50–59) and oldest (90–96) age groups are at highest risk of having depression at Autumn 2020. Furthermore, a clear gradient is observed by value of savings and investments. Individuals with fewer savings are at greater risk of depression at Autumn 2020 compared to those with over $1 million in savings. The similar trend is shown for household income and highest education attained, although those results were not significantly different. Interestingly, owning a pet was associated with having depression at Autumn 2020.
As shown in Table 4, experiences of any COVID-19 stressors (health stressors, resource access, family conflict, other family issues, and healthcare) were associated with having depression at the Autumn 2020 questionnaire. The association between experience of family conflict and depression was the strongest for both participants without history of depression (aOR = 5.13 [4.45–5.92]) and with history of depression (aOR = 3.56 [3.05–4.15]). All three loneliness variables were also strongly associated with being depressed at Autumn 2020. Surprisingly, those who were essential workers during COVID-19 were at lower risk of being depressed compared to those who were not.
We found that a history of depression, as measured at follow-up 1, was strongly related to having depression at the Autumn 2020 questionnaire (Table 5). Specifically, those with a history of depression were nearly four times more likely more likely to have depression relative to those without a history of depression (aOR = 3.79, 95% CI: 3.48–4.12). The strength of this association was even stronger among those with a recent history of depression (aOR = 5.87, 95% CI: 5.27–6.55). Stratified analyses by sex revealed similar patterns in men and women.

4. Discussion

This longitudinal analysis examined depression among older Canadians with and without a history of depression during the COVID-19 pandemic. We found that older adults with a pre-pandemic history of depression were 5.6 times more likely to have depression during the COVID-19 pandemic when compared to those with no pre-pandemic history of depression. Controlling for relevant sociodemographics, health factors, and COVID-19 related adversities had only a modest attenuation on this relationship, as individuals with a history of depression were still 3.8 times more likely to have depression than those without a history of depression. This finding aligns with previous research that has found history of depression to be a leading risk factor for recurrence of depression in later life [18,19,20,21].
When examining differences in depression by recency of depression history, we found that individuals with a recent history of depression were 1.80 times more likely to have depression during the pandemic when compared to those with a distant history of depression. Older adults with a recent history of depression who experienced a recurrent episode of depression during the pandemic may represent a particularly vulnerable subset. Research on the recurrence of depression has found that experiencing a high number of depressive episodes in one’s lifetime and/or more severe depressive episodes are both associated with depression relapse and a shorter time to depression recurrence [34]. In addition, risk factors for recurring depressive symptoms in later life, such as loneliness [16] and stressful life events, including financial difficulties and relationship conflict [34] have been exacerbated by the pandemic [35,36].
Our analysis revealed several factors that were associated with both incident and recurrent depression among older adults during the pandemic. Unsurprisingly, individuals who experienced various dimensions of loneliness, such as feeling left out, feeling isolated, and lacking companionship had approximately 4 to 5 times higher risk of both incident and recurrent depression. This aligns with the substantial body of research that has found loneliness to be a major risk factor for both incident and recurrent depression among older adults [15,16,17]. These findings indicate that this pattern has persisted into the COVID-19 pandemic.
Older women were found to be more vulnerable to developing depression during the pandemic. Specifically, older women with no pre-pandemic history of depression were 1.54 times more likely to experience depression when compared to their male counterparts with no history of depression. Additionally, older women with a history of depression were 1.34 times more likely to experience recurrent depression than older men with a history of depression. Many studies have found that women are more likely than men to experience both incident and persistent depressive symptoms in later life [19,37]. Emerging research on mental health outcomes during COVID-19 indicates that this pattern has continued into the pandemic [38,39]. Lack of social support may partly explain the high vulnerability to depression among older women during the pandemic. Sonnenberg and colleagues [40] examined gender differences in the relationship between depression and social support in later life and found that low social support combined with a high need for social affiliation, such as the need to go to others for support during difficult times, was associated with depression among older women only. It is possible that the COVID-19 pandemic has led to a disparity between one’s need for social support and the accessibility of such support due to extended periods of lockdown and physical distancing. An additional study on gender differences in depression in older adulthood found that regular engagement in social outings acted as protective factor against depression for older women, but not for older men [41]. The ability to socialize in person was largely disrupted for extended periods of the pandemic, which may also influence the heightened risk of depression among older women.
There were several measures of socioeconomic status that were associated with depression among older adults during the pandemic, with some variation between those with and without a lifetime history of depression. For both incident and recurrent depression, these factors include having less than $100,000 in savings/investments in comparison to those with $1,000,000 or more in savings/investments, renting or owning a house with a mortgage compared to those who have paid off their mortgage, perceiving one’s income to be inadequate for satisfying their basic needs, and having difficulties accessing necessary resources during the pandemic. For recurrent depression only, completing less than secondary school was also associated with depression when compared to those counterparts with a post-secondary diploma. Research conducted prior to the pandemic has found socioeconomic disadvantage increases the odds of depression in later life, above and beyond demographic, lifestyle, social, and health factors [42,43]. Many of these socioeconomic risk factors may have been exacerbated by the economic precarity of the pandemic, particularly for individuals with less economic security. This may partially explain our finding that the risk of incident depression was lower among older adults who were essential workers when compared to those who were not essential workers. These individuals may have had greater economic stability during the early stages of the pandemic when compared to those who worked in industries that were disproportionately affected by periods of lockdown, such as retail and hospitality. Low assets and financial stressors during the pandemic have been found to be associated with higher odds of depression [44]. In contrast, having more assets, such as household savings, appear to afford protection against persistent depression symptoms during COVID [39]. These findings highlight the disproportionate mental health burden among individuals with low socioeconomic status during the pandemic.

Limitations

There are some limitations that are important to consider when interpreting the findings of this analysis. First, depression was based upon the CES-D-10, a self-report measure. Although this measure has been found to have a 92% sensitivity with clinical interviews for identifying major depressive disorder [45], a psychiatrist assessment would have been preferable. Second, our sample did not include any individuals who had been residing in long-term care institutions during the baseline wave of data collection. When considering the extensive lockdowns in long-term care homes during the pandemic, it is likely that this population would have been particularly vulnerable to adverse mental health outcomes. As a result, the current study may underestimate the depressive symptoms in Canadian older adults by excluding this population. This also limits the generalizability of our findings to community-dwelling older adults. A further limitation is the lack of information on the exact onset of the depression. Although we know that respondents in the incident depression analysis were not depressed at or prior to the follow-up 1 wave, and that they were depressed in the autumn of 2020, we do not have information on the exact timing of the onset. It is possible that some individuals in this group developed depression after the follow-up 1 wave but before the COVID-19 pandemic. Thus, it is more helpful to think of this incidence as “period incidence.” Finally, the current study was only able to examine depression relatively early in the COVID-19 pandemic. While this period likely represents one of the most challenging times of the pandemic, given the severity of public health restrictions in many regions at this time, it is likely that some individuals would have experienced incident or recurrent depression later in the pandemic. Future longitudinal research should examine mental health patterns throughout various stages of the pandemic.

5. Conclusions

Despite these limitations, this longitudinal analysis provides valuable insights about depression among Canadian older adults during the COVID-19 pandemic. This study illuminates some of the key differences in depression risk between those with and without a history of depression, and also emphasizes the role that pre-pandemic factors play in the likelihood of experiencing depression during the pandemic. Vulnerable subpopulations among older adults, such as those with previous depression, women, and those with low socioeconomic status, are bearing a substantial mental health burden during the COVID-19 pandemic. By identifying subgroups of older adults with a heightened vulnerability to depression during the pandemic, the current study highlights the importance of targeted interventions to support these individuals. The under-treatment of depression, particularly persistent depression in older adults, is an ongoing public health issue [46,47]. It is essential to address the potential longstanding effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on the mental health of older adults.

Author Contributions

A.M.: conceptualization, writing—original draft, writing—reviewing & editing; S.B.: conceptualization, methodology, formal analysis, writing—original draft, writing—reviewing & editing; P.J.V.: conceptualization, methodology, formal analysis, writing—original draft, writing—reviewing & editing, supervision; Y.J.: conceptualization, writing—reviewing and editing, supervision; M.d.G.: conceptualization, writing—reviewing and editing, supervision; E.F.-T.: conceptualization, writing—reviewing and editing, supervision. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was supported, in part, by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) grant #172862. (PI Fuller-Thomson).

Institutional Review Board Statement

The secondary analysis conducted in this study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki, and approved by the Institutional Review Board of the University of Toronto; Protocol # 41167; Approved 29 June 2021).

Informed Consent Statement

The original data collection for the CLSA was approved by the Hamilton Integrated Research Ethics Board and by research ethics boards of all the participating institutions across Canada. Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study.

Data Availability Statement

Data are available from the Canadian Longitudinal Study on Aging (www.clsa-elcv.ca) for researchers who meet the criteria for access to de-identified CLSA data.

Acknowledgments

This research was made possible using the data collected by the Canadian Longitudinal Study on Aging (CLSA). Funding for the Canadian Longitudinal Study on Aging (CLSA) is provided by the Government of Canada through the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) under grant reference: LSA 94473 and the Canada Foundation for Innovation. This research has been conducted using the Baseline Comprehensive Dataset version 6.0, Baseline Tracking Dataset version 3.7, Follow-up 1 Comprehensive Dataset version 3.0 and Follow-up 1 Tracking Dataset version 2.2, COVID-19 Questionnaire Study Dataset version 1.0 under Application ID 2104024. The CLSA is led by Parminder Raina, Christina Wolfson and Susan Kirkland. The opinions expressed in this manuscript are the author’s own and do not reflect the views of the Canadian Longitudinal Study on Aging. Esme Fuller-Thomson would like to gratefully acknowledge the support of the Canadian Frailty Network and the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) grant #172862 (PI: EFT).

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Arora, T.; Grey, I.; Östlundh, L.; Lam KB, H.; Omar, O.M.; Arnone, D. The prevalence of psychological consequences of COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies. J. Health Psychol. 2022, 27, 805–824. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Mahmud, S.; Hossain, S.; Muyeed, A.; Islam, M.M.; Mohsin, M. The global prevalence of depression, anxiety, stress, and, insomnia and its changes among health professionals during COVID-19 pandemic: A rapid systematic review and meta-analysis. Heliyon 2021, 7, e07393. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Banerjee, D.; Rai, M. Social isolation in COVID-19: The impact of loneliness. Int. J. Soc. Psychiatry 2020, 66, 525–527. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Gilmour, H. Positive Mental Health and Mental Illness; Statistics Canada: Ottawa, ON, Canada, 2014; Available online: https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/en/pub/82-003-x/2014009/article/14086-eng.pdf?st=GazFhxqI (accessed on 1 December 2021).
  5. Gum, A.M.; King-Kallimanis, B.; Kohn, R. Prevalence of mood, anxiety, and substance-abuse disorders for older Americans in the National Comorbidity Survey-Replication. Am. J. Geriatr. Psychiatry 2009, 17, 769–781. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Starke, K.R.; Reissig, D.; Petereit-Haack, G.; Schmauder, S.; Nienhaus, A.; Seidler, A. The isolated effect of age on the risk of COVID-19 severe outcomes: A systematic review with meta-analysis. BMJ Global Health 2021, 6, e006434. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Daly, J.R.; Depp, C.; Graham, S.A.; Jeste, D.V.; Kim, H.C.; Lee, E.E.; Nebeker, C. Health impacts of the stay-at-home order on community-dwelling older adults and how technologies may help: Focus group study. JMIR Aging 2021, 4, e25779. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Reynolds, L. The COVID-19 pandemic exposes limited understanding of ageism. J. Aging Soc. Policy 2020, 32, 499–505. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Vahia, I.V.; Jeste, D.V.; Reynolds, C.F. Older adults and the mental health effects of COVID-19. JAMA 2020, 324, 2253–2254. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Su, Y.; Rao, W.; Li, M.; Caron, G.; D’Arcy, C.; Meng, X. Prevalence of loneliness and social isolation among older adults during the COVID-19 pandemic: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Int. Psychogeriatr. 2022, 1–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Surkalim, D.L.; Luo, M.; Eres, R.; Gebel, K.; van Buskirk, J.; Bauman, A.; Ding, D. The prevalence of loneliness across 113 countries: Systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ 2022, 376, e067068. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Kasar, K.S.; Karaman, E. Life in lockdown: Social isolation, loneliness and quality of life in the elderly during the COVİD-19 pandemic: A scoping review. Geriatr. Nurs. 2021, 42, 1222–1229. [Google Scholar]
  13. Rodney, T.; Josiah, N.; Baptiste, D.L. Loneliness in the time of COVID-19: Impact on older adults. J. Adv. Nurs. 2021, 77, e24–e26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Savage, R.D.; Wu, W.; Li, J.; Lawson, A.; Bronskill, S.E.; Chamberlain, S.A.; Rochon, P.A. Loneliness among older adults in the community during COVID-19: A cross-sectional survey in Canada. BMJ Open 2021, 11, e044517. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. Gabarrell-Pascuet, A.; Moneta, M.V.; Ayuso-Mateos, J.L.; Miret, M.; Lara, E.; Haro, J.M.; Domènech-Abella, J. The effect of loneliness and social support on the course of major depressive disorder among adults aged 50 years and older: A longitudinal study. Depress. Anxiety 2022, 39, 147–155, Advance online publication. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. Holvast, F.; Burger, H.; de Waal, M.M.; van Marwijk, W.H.; Comijs, C.H.; Verhaak, F.P. Loneliness is associated with poor prognosis in late-life depression: Longitudinal analysis of the Netherlands study of depression in older persons. J. Affect. Disord. 2015, 185, 1–7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  17. Lee, S.L.; Pearce, E.; Ajnakina, O.; Johnson, S.; Lewis, G.; Mann, F.; Lewis, G. The association between loneliness and depressive symptoms among adults aged 50 years and older: A 12-year population-based cohort study. Lancet Psychiatry 2021, 8, 48–57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Almeida, O.; Draper, B.; Pirkis, J.; Snowdon, J.; Lautenschlager, N.; Byrne, G.; Pfaff, J. Anxiety, depression, and comorbid anxiety and depression: Risk factors and outcome over two years. Int. Psychogeriatr. 2012, 24, 1622–1632. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  19. Gallagher, D.; Savva, G.M.; Kenny, R.; Lawlor, B.A. What predicts persistent depression in older adults across Europe? Utility of clinical and neuropsychological predictors from the SHARE study. J. Affect. Disord. 2013, 147, 192–197. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Richardson, T.M.; Friedman, B.; Podgorski, C.; Knox, K.; Fisher, S.; He, H.; Conwell, Y. Depression and its correlates among older adults accessing aging services. Am. J. Geriatr. Psychiatry 2012, 20, 346–354. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  21. Rodda, J.; Walker, Z.; Carter, J. Depression in older adults. BMJ (Clin. Res. Ed.) 2011, 343, d5219. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Fiske, A.; Wetherell, J.L.; Gatz, M. Depression in older adults. Annu. Rev. Clin. Psychol. 2009, 5, 363–389. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. Yaka, E.; Keskinoglu, P.; Ucku, R.; Yener, G.G.; Tunca, Z. Prevalence and risk factors of depression among community dwelling elderly. Arch. Gerontol. Geriatr. 2014, 59, 150–154. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Barnett, A.; Zhang, C.J.; Johnston, J.M.; Cerin, E. Relationships between the neighborhood environment and depression in older adults: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Int. Psychogeriatr. 2018, 30, 1153–1176. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. Read, J.R.; Sharpe, L.; Modini, M.; Dear, B.F. Multimorbidity and depression: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J. Affect. Disord. 2017, 221, 36–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  26. Anstey, K.J.; von Sanden, C.; Sargent-Cox, K.; Luszcz, M.A. Prevalence and risk factors for depression in a longitudinal, population-based study including individuals in the community and residential care. Am. J. Geriatr. Psychiatry 2007, 15, 497–505. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Choi, K.H.; Denice, P.; Haan, M.; Zajacova, A. Studying the social determinants of COVID-19 in a data vacuum. Can. Rev. Sociol./Rev. Can. Sociol. 2021, 58, 146–164. [Google Scholar]
  28. Jenkins, E.K.; McAuliffe, C.; Hirani, S.; Richardson, C.; Thomson, K.C.; McGuinness, L.; Gadermann, A. A portrait of the early and differential mental health impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic in Canada: Findings from the first wave of a nationally representative cross-sectional survey. Prev. Med. 2021, 145, 106333. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Wang, Y.; Fu, P.; Li, J.; Jing, Z.; Wang, Q.; Zhao, D.; Zhou, C. Changes in psychological distress before and during the COVID-19 pandemic among older adults: The contribution of frailty transitions and multimorbidity. Age Ageing 2021, 50, 1011–1018. [Google Scholar]
  30. Raina, P.; Wolfson, C.; Kirkland, S.; Griffith, L.E.; Balion, C.; Cossette, B.; Young, L. Cohort profile: The Canadian Longitudinal Study on Aging (CLSA). Int. J. Epidemiol. 2019, 48, 1752–1753j. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  31. Raina, P.S.; Wolfson, C.; Kirkland, S.A.; Griffith, L.E.; Oremus, M.; Patterson, C.; Brazil, K. The Canadian longitudinal study on aging (CLSA). Can. J. Aging/La Rev. Can. Vieil. 2009, 28, 221–229. [Google Scholar]
  32. 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]
  33. Andresen, E.M.; Malmgren, J.A.; Carter, W.B.; Patrick, D.L. Screening for depression in well older adults: Evaluation of a short form of the CES-D. Am. J. Prev. Med. 1994, 10, 77–84. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Hardeveld, F.; Spijker, J.; De Graaf, R.; Nolen, W.A.; Beekman, A.T.F. Recurrence of major depressive disorder and its predictors in the general population: Results from The Netherlands Mental Health Survey and Incidence Study (NEMESIS). Psychol. Med. 2013, 43, 39–48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  35. Dahlberg, L. Loneliness during the COVID-19 pandemic. Aging Ment. Health 2021, 25, 1161–1164. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  36. Larson, M.E.; Chavez, J.V.; Behar-Zusman, V. Family functioning in an international sample of households reporting adult caregiving during the COVID-19 pandemic. Fam. Syst. Health 2021, 39, 609–617. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Raina, P.; Wolfson, C.; Kirkland, S.; Griffith, L. The Canadian Longitudinal Study on Aging (CLSA) Report on Health and Aging in Canada. Findings from Baseline Data Collection 2010–2015. Canadian Longitudinal Study on Aging. 2018. Available online: https://www.clsa-elcv.ca/doc/2639 (accessed on 23 September 2022).
  38. Ettman, C.K.; Abdalla, S.M.; Cohen, G.H.; Sampson, L.; Vivier, P.M.; Galea, S. Prevalence of depression symptoms in US adults before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. JAMA Netw. Open 2020, 3, e2019686. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Ettman, C.K.; Cohen, G.H.; Abdalla, S.M.; Sampson, L.; Trinquart, L.; Castrucci, B.C.; Galea, S. Persistent depressive symptoms during COVID-19: A national, population-representative, longitudinal study of US adults. Lancet Reg. Health-Am. 2022, 5, 100091. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Sonnenberg, C.M.; Deeg, D.J.H.; Van Tilburg, T.G.; Vink, D.; Stek, M.L.; Beekman, A.T.F. Gender differences in the relation between depression and social support in later life. Int. Psychogeriatr. 2013, 25, 61–70. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Carayanni, V.; Stylianopoulou, C.; Koulierakis, G.; Babatsikou, F.; Koutis, C. Sex differences in depression among older adults: Are older women more vulnerable than men in social risk factors? The case of open care centers for older people in Greece. Eur. J. Ageing 2012, 9, 177–186. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  42. Almeida, O.P.; Alfonso, H.; Pirkis, J.; Kerse, N.; Sim, M.; Flicker, L.; Pfaff, J. A practical approach to assess depression risk and to guide risk reduction strategies in later life. Int. Psychogeriatr. 2011, 23, 280–291. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  43. Almeida, O.P.; Pirkis, J.; Kerse, N.; Sim, M.; Flicker, L.; Snowdon, J.; Pfaff, J.J. Socioeconomic disadvantage increases risk of prevalent and persistent depression in later life. J. Affect. Disord. 2012, 138, 322–331. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  44. Ettman, C.K.; Abdalla, S.M.; Cohen, G.H.; Sampson, L.; Vivier, P.M.; Galea, S. Low assets and financial stressors associated with higher depression during COVID-19 in a nationally representative sample of US adults. J. Epidemiol. Community Health 2021, 75, 501–508. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  45. Quiñones, A.R.; Thielke, S.M.; Clark, M.E.; Phillips, K.M.; Elnitsky, C.; Andresen, E.M. Validity of center for epidemiologic studies depression (CES-D) scale in sample of Iraq and Afghanistan veterans. SAGE Open Med. 2016, 4, 2050312116643906. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  46. Barry, L.C.; Abou, J.J.; Simen, A.A.; Gill, T.M. Under-treatment of depression in older persons. J. Affect. Disord. 2012, 136, 789–796. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Haigh, E.A.; Bogucki, O.E.; Sigmon, S.T.; Blazer, D.G. Depression among older adults: A 20-year update on five common myths and misconceptions. Am. J. Geriatr. Psychiatry 2018, 26, 107–122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Ijerph 19 15032 g001 550
Figure 1. Study flowchart of CLSA participants used in this study.
Figure 1. Study flowchart of CLSA participants used in this study.
Ijerph 19 15032 g001
Table
Table 1. History of depression across socio-demographic characteristics.
Table 1. History of depression across socio-demographic characteristics.
Characteristics Total
(n = 22,622)		 Prevalence of History of Depression a No History of Depression
(n = 16,525)		 History of Depression
(n = 6097)		 p-Value
n % % n % n %
Sex Male 10,583 46.8 20.9 8382 50.7 2201 36.1
Female 12,039 53.2 32.4 8143 49.3 3896 63.9 <0.001
                   
Age-group 50–59 4183 18.5 28.1 3006 18.2 1177 19.3
60–69 8167 36.1 28.8 5817 35.2 2350 38.5
70–79 6629 29.3 24.8 4985 30.2 1644 27.0
80–89 3387 15.0 24.9 2542 15.4 845 13.9
90–96 256 1.1 31.6 175 1.1 81 1.3 <0.001
                   
Household
income		 <20,000 777 3.4 49.7 391 2.4 386 6.3
20,000–<50,000 4514 20.0 35.0 2936 17.8 1578 25.9
50,000–<100,000 8143 36.0 26.2 6012 36.4 2131 35.0
100,000–<150,000 4397 19.4 21.7 3442 20.8 955 15.7
≥150,000 3597 15.9 18.6 2927 17.7 670 11.0
Missing 1194 5.3 31.6 817 4.9 377 6.2 <0.001
                   
Highest attained
education		 Less than secondary school 173 0.8 37.0 109 0.7 64 1.0
Secondary school 1453 6.4 28.6 1038 6.3 415 6.8
Some post-secondary education 7142 31.6 29.1 5064 30.6 2078 34.1
Post-secondary degree 10,552 46.6 24.0 8016 48.5 2536 41.6
Missing 3302 14.6 30.4 2298 13.9 1004 16.5 <0.001
                   
Value of savings and investments <50,000 4076 18.0 37.4 2552 15.4 1524 25.0
50,000–<100,000 3238 14.3 30.1 2261 13.7 977 16.0
100,000–<1 million 11,285 49.9 23.9 8589 52.0 2696 44.2
≥1 million 2424 10.7 17.2 2008 12.2 416 6.8
Missing 1599 7.1 30.3 1115 6.7 484 7.9 <0.001
                   
Dwelling ownership Renting 2751 12.2 40.9 1627 9.8 1124 18.4
Own–with mortgage 5994 26.5 29.2 4242 25.7 1752 28.7
Own–mortgage paid off completely 13,505 59.7 22.9 10,408 63.0 3097 50.8
Own-mortgage unspecified 63 0.3 20.6 50 0.3 13 0.2
Other 233 1.0 33.9 154 0.9 79 1.3 <0.001
                   
Immigrant status Born in Canada 19,089 84.4 27.3 13,869 83.9 5220 85.6
Not born in Canada 3531 15.6 24.8 2654 16.1 877 14.4 0.002
                   
Marital Status Single 1871 8.3 38.2 1156 7.0 715 11.7
Married/Common-law 15,969 70.6 22.8 12,329 74.6 3640 59.7
Separated/Divorced/Widowed 4768 21.1 36.5 3030 18.3 1738 28.5 <0.001
                   
Perceived community standing 1–5 6905 30.5 32.5 4664 28.2 2241 36.8
6–7 7696 35.2 26.3 5870 35.5 2099 34.3
8–10 6985 30.9 21.7 5469 33.1 1516 24.9 <0.001
                   
Perception of income satisfying basic needs Adequate 21,184 93.6 25.0 15,881 96.1 5303 87.0
Inadequate 1340 5.9 56.2 587 3.6 753 12.4 <0.001
                   
BMI Underweight/normal weight 7030 31.1 24.1 5334 32.3 1696 27.8
Overweight 9164 40.5 24.8 6893 41.7 2271 37.2
Obese 6248 27.6 33.0 4184 25.3 2064 33.9 <0.001
                   
Chronic Pain Yes 7638 33.8 38.3 4710 28.5 2928 48.0
No 14,953 66.1 21.1 11,795 71.4 3158 51.8 <0.001
                   
Multimorbidity No chronic conditions 11,570 51.1 21.1 9131 55.3 2439 40.0
1 chronic condition 7057 31.2 29.0 5010 30.3 2047 33.6
2 or more chronic conditions 3766 16.6 41.0 2221 13.4 1545 25.3 <0.001
                   
Childhood adversities Less than three 11,629 51.4 20.9 9201 55.7 2428 39.8
Three or more 9709 42.9 33.1 6498 39.3 3211 52.7
Missing 1284 5.7 35.7 826 5.0 458 7.5 <0.001
                   
Household pet Yes 8868 39.2 29.7 6233 37.7 2635 43.2
No 13,731 60.7 25.1 10,278 62.2 3453 56.6 <0.001
a History of depression was identified at the time of Follow-Up 1 questionnaire.
Table
Table 2. History of depression across COVID-related factors.
Table 2. History of depression across COVID-related factors.
COVID-Related Factor a Total
(n = 22,622)		 Prevalence of History of Depression No History of Depression
(n = 16,525)		 History of Depression
(n = 6097)		 p-Value
n % % n % n %
Living alone Yes 5527 24.8 36.3 3520 21.3 2007 32.9
No 16,716 75.2 23.8 12,732 77.0 3984 65.3 <0.001
                   
Essential worker Yes 2396 10.6 26.0 1773 10.7 623 10.2
No 3279 14.5 26.4 2412 14.6 866 14.2
Missing 16,947 74.9 27.2 12,339 74.7 4608 75.6 0.354
                   
COVID health stressors Yes 7295 32.4 31.9 4967 30.1 2328 38.1
No 15,222 67.6 24.5 11,490 69.5 3732 61.2 <0.001
                   
COVID resource access Yes 3660 16.3 32.8 2458 14.9 1202 19.7
No 18,857 83.7 25.8 13,999 84.7 4858 79.7 <0.001
                   
COVID family conflict Yes 1992 8.8 45.0 1095 6.6 897 14.7
No 20,525 91.2 25.2 15,362 93.0 5163 84.7 <0.001
                   
COVID other family issues Yes 12,811 56.9 28.7 9133 55.3 3678 60.4
No 9706 43.1 24.5 7324 44.3 2382 39.1 <0.001
                   
COVID health care Yes 5514 24.5 32.6 3718 22.5 1796 29.5
No 17,003 75.5 25.1 12,739 77.1 4264 69.9 <0.001
                   
Lack companionship Yes 8377 37.1 39.7 5049 30.6 3328 54.5
No 14,191 62.9 19.4 11,441 69.2 2750 45.1 <0.001
                   
Feeling left out Yes 6345 28.2 42.2 3668 22.2 2677 43.9
No 16,119 71.8 20.8 12,764 77.2 3355 55.0 <0.001
                   
Feeling isolated Yes 9584 42.5 40.0 6041 36.5 3543 58.1
No 12,960 57.5 19.4 10,440 63.2 2520 41.3 <0.001
a Living alone and essential worker status were captured at COVID-19 baseline. COVID-19 related stressors and loneliness variables were captured in Autumn 2020.
Table
Table 3. Predictors of depression at the Autumn 2020 questionnaire among those with no history of depression and those with any history of depression.
Table 3. Predictors of depression at the Autumn 2020 questionnaire among those with no history of depression and those with any history of depression.
Characteristics No History of Depression
(n = 16,525)		 History of Depression
(n = 6097)
Crude OR Adjusted OR a Crude OR Adjusted OR a
Sex Male (ref.) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Female 1.54 (1.40–1.69) 1.50 (1.36–1.65) 1.34 (1.21–1.49) 1.31 (1.18–1.46)
           
Age-group 50–59 1.38 (1.21–1.57) 1.37 (1.20–1.57) 1.34 (1.15–1.55) 1.35 (1.16–1.58)
60–69 1.07 (0.96–1.21) 1.07 (0.95–1.20) 1.10 (0.97–1.25) 1.12 (0.98–1.27)
70–79 (ref.) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
80–89 1.14 (0.99–1.32) 1.13 (0.97–1.31) 1.12 (0.95–1.33) 1.09 (0.92–1.29)
90–96 1.63 (1.10–2.43) 1.57 (1.05–2.34) 1.08 (0.69–1.70) 1.06 (0.67–1.66)
           
Household income <20,000 1.12 (0.82–1.54) 0.95 (0.68–1.33) 1.28 (0.99–1.64) 1.29 (0.98–1.70)
20,000–<50,000 1.23 (1.05–1.43) 1.16 (0.97–1.38) 1.15 (0.96–1.38) 1.22 (1.00–1.49)
50,000–<100,000 1.11 (0.97–1.27) 1.13 (0.98–1.30) 1.02 (0.86–1.21) 1.08 (0.90–1.29)
100,000–<150,000 1.07 (0.92–1.24) 1.10 (0.95–1.28) 0.99 (0.81–1.21) 1.03 (0.84–1.26)
≥150,000 (ref.) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Missing 1.21 (0.97–1.52) 1.12 (0.89–1.43) 1.28 (1.00–1.65) 1.34 (1.02–1.74)
           
Highest education attained Secondary school diploma 1.18 (0.98–1.42) 1.15 (0.95–1.38) 1.03 (0.84–1.27) 1.03 (0.83–1.26)
Some postsecondary 1.06 (0.96–1.18) 1.02 (0.92–1.14) 0.97 (0.86–1.09) 0.95 (0.85–1.07)
Post-secondary diploma (ref.) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Missing 0.96 (0.83–1.10) 0.92 (0.80–1.07) 0.94 (0.81–1.09) 0.93 (0.80–1.09)
           
Value of savings and investments < 50,000 1.36 (1.13–1.62) 1.17 (0.97–1.40) 1.41 (1.13–1.75) 1.30 (1.04–1.63)
50,000–<100,000 1.29 (1.08–1.56) 1.14 (0.95–1.38) 1.32 (1.05–1.67) 1.24 (0.98–1.57)
100,000–<1 million 1.18 (1.01–1.37) 1.10 (0.94–1.28) 1.16 (0.94–1.43) 1.12 (0.91–1.39)
≥1 million (ref.) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Missing 1.34 (1.08–1.67) 1.19 (0.95–1.49) 1.50 (1.15–1.95) 1.43 (1.09–1.87)
           
Dwelling ownership Renting 1.29 (1.11–1.49) 1.15 (0.98–1.34) 1.21 (1.06–1.39) 1.16 (1.00–1.34)
Own–with mortgage 1.15 (1.04–1.28) 1.09 (0.97–1.22) 1.28 (1.13–1.43) 1.22 (1.08–1.38)
Own–mortgage paid off (ref.) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
           
Immigrant status Born in Canada (ref.) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Not born in Canada 1.05 (0.93–1.18) 1.09 (0.97–1.24) 1.12 (0.97–1.29) 1.14 (0.99–1.32)
           
Marital Status Married/Common-law (ref.) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Single 1.51 (1.28–1.78) 1.43 (1.22–1.68) 1.11 (0.95–1.31) 1.08 (0.92–1.27)
Separated/Divorced/Widowed 1.26 (1.12–1.41) 1.14 (1.01–1.29) 1.17 (1.04–1.31) 1.14 (1.01–1.28)
           
Perceived community standing 1-5 1.33 (1.18–1.50) 1.30 (1.16–1.47) 1.79 (1.57–2.05) 1.76 (1.54–2.01)
6-7 1.22 (1.09–1.37) 1.22 (1.09–1.36) 1.32 (1.16–1.52) 1.31 (1.14–1.50)
8-10 (ref.) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
           
Perception of income satisfying basic needs Adequate (ref.) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Inadequate 1.69 (1.37–2.08) 1.58 (1.27–1.95) 1.89 (1.62–2.21) 1.83 (1.57–2.15)
           
BMI Underweight/normal weight (ref.) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Overweight 0.89 (0.80–0.99) 0.98 (0.88–1.09) 0.96 (0.85–1.09) 1.01 (0.89–1.15)
Obese 1.11 (0.98–1.24) 1.17 (1.04–1.32) 1.22 (1.07–1.39) 1.26 (1.11–1.44)
           
Chronic Pain No (ref.) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Yes 1.51 (1.37–1.66) 1.48 (1.34–1.63) 1.57 (1.42–1.74) 1.56 (1.41–1.73)
           
Multimorbidity No chronic conditions (ref.) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
One chronic condition 1.22 (1.10–1.36) 1.23 (1.11–1.36) 1.08 (0.96–1.22) 1.10 (0.98–1.24)
Two or more chronic conditions 1.56 (1.37–1.77) 1.58 (1.39–1.80) 1.49 (1.31–1.69) 1.51 (1.32–1.72)
           
Childhood adversities Less than three (ref.) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Three or more 1.43 (1.30–1.57) 1.44 (1.31–1.58) 1.51 (1.36–1.68) 1.52 (1.36–1.69)
Missing 1.26 (1.02–1.55) 1.25 (1.01–1.54) 1.70 (1.39–2.08) 1.69 (1.38–2.06)
           
Household pet No (ref.) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Yes 1.22 (1.11–1.34) 1.20 (1.09–1.32) 1.24 (1.12–1.37) 1.20 (1.08–1.34)
Data are presented as OR (95% CI). Bolded ORs and 95% Cis are statistically significant. ORs for categories with less than 2% of respondents were not reported. a Adjusted for age, sex, and marital status.
Table
Table 4. Adjusted odds a (95% confidence interval) of depression during Autumn 2020 among those with no history of depression, any history of depression, recent depression (during follow-up 1 wave), and distant depression (prior to follow-up 1 wave).
Table 4. Adjusted odds a (95% confidence interval) of depression during Autumn 2020 among those with no history of depression, any history of depression, recent depression (during follow-up 1 wave), and distant depression (prior to follow-up 1 wave).
COVID-Related Factor Total
(n = 22,622)		 No History of Depression
(n = 16,525)		 History of Depression
(n = 6097)		 Distant Depression
(n = 3213)		 Recent Depression
(n = 2884)
Living alone No (ref.) 16,716 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Yes 5527 1.31 (1.11–1.54) 1.19 (1.01–1.41) 1.29 (1.00–1.67) 0.98 (0.78–1.22)
             
Essential worker No (ref.) 2396 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Yes 3279 0.69 (0.57–0.83) 0.90 (0.72–1.12) 1.10 (0.81–1.50) 0.63 (0.45–0.89)
Missing 16,947 0.81 (0.70–0.93) 1.01 (0.85–1.20) 1.03 (0.81–1.31) 0.84 (0.64–1.11)
             
COVID health stressors No (ref.) 7295 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Yes 15,222 1.64 (1.48–1.81) 1.37 (1.22–1.53) 1.35 (1.15–1.60) 1.28 (1.09–1.52)
             
COVID resource access No (ref.) 3660 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Yes 18,857 1.68 (1.48–1.91) 1.67 (1.45–1.92) 1.59 (1.30–1.95) 1.75 (1.41–2.17)
             
COVID family conflict No (ref.) 1992 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Yes 20,525 5.13 (4.45–5.92) 3.57 (3.01–4.23) 3.89 (3.06–4.94) 3.06 (2.38–3.94)
             
COVID other family issues No (ref.) 12,811 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Yes 9706 1.72 (1.55–1.91) 1.57 (1.39–1.76) 1.53 (1.29–1.81) 1.63 (1.38–1.93)
             
COVID health care No (ref.) 5514 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Yes 17,003 1.90 (1.70–2.11) 1.77 (1.56–2.00) 1.81 (1.52–2.16) 1.66 (1.39–1.99)
             
Lack companionship No (ref.) 14,191 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Yes 8377 5.00 (4.49–5.55) 4.19 (3.70–4.74) 4.15 (3.48–4.95) 3.66 (3.05–4.38)
             
Feeling left out No (ref.) 16,119 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Yes 6345 5.66 (5.10–6.28) 4.92 (4.36–5.55) 4.99 (4.20–5.94) 4.26 (3.57–5.07)
             
Feeling isolated No (ref.) 12,960 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Yes 9584 5.32 (4.78–5.94) 4.49 (3.97–5.08) 4.27 (3.58–5.10) 4.31 (3.59–5.16)
a Odds ratios are adjusted for age, sex, value of savings, marital status, chronic pain, and experiences of childhood adversities.
Table
Table 5. Crude and adjusted odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals of being depressed during Autumn 2020 based on pre-pandemic history of depression status and sex.
Table 5. Crude and adjusted odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals of being depressed during Autumn 2020 based on pre-pandemic history of depression status and sex.
By Pre-Pandemic History of Depression Status Depressed at Autumn 2020 Crude OR (95% CI) Adjusted OR (95% CI)
No % Yes %
No history of depression 14,397 87.1 2128 12.9 1.00 1.00
Any history of depression 3342 54.8 2755 45.2 5.58 (5.21–5.97) 3.79 (3.48–4.12) a
Distant history of depression 2136 66.5 1077 33.5 3.41 (3.13–3.72) 2.57 (2.31–2.85) a
Recent history of depression 1206 41.8 1678 58.2 9.41 (8.63–10.27) 5.87 (5.27–6.55) a
By sex            
Male            
No history of depression 7501 89.5 881 10.5 1.00 1.00
Any history of depression 1308 59.4 893 40.6 5.81 (5.21–6.49) 4.11 (3.59–4.71) b
Distant history of depression 849 71.3 342 28.7 3.43 (2.97–3.96) 2.68 (2.25–3.18) b
Recent history of depression 459 45.4 551 54.6 10.22 (8.87–11.78) 6.62 (5.55–7.90) b
Female            
No history of depression 6896 84.7 1247 15.3 1.00 1.00
Any history of depression 2034 52.2 3109 47.8 5.06 (4.64–5.52) 3.60 (3.23–4.01) b
Distant history of depression 1287 63.6 735 36.4 3.16 (2.83–3.52) 2.49 (2.18–2.85) b
Recent history of depression 747 39.9 1127 60.1 8.34 (7.47–9.32) 5.46 (4.76–6.27) b
a Adjusted model includes age, sex, value of savings, marital status, chronic pain, experience of childhood adversity, loneliness (feeling left out), living alone during COVID-19, and COVD-19 related stressors. b Adjusted model includes age, value of savings, marital status, chronic pain, experience of childhood adversity, loneliness (feeling left out), living alone during COVID-19, and COVD-19 related stressors.
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

MacNeil, A.; Birk, S.; Villeneuve, P.J.; Jiang, Y.; de Groh, M.; Fuller-Thomson, E. Incident and Recurrent Depression among Adults Aged 50 Years and Older during the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Longitudinal Analysis of the Canadian Longitudinal Study on Aging. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 15032. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph192215032

AMA Style

MacNeil A, Birk S, Villeneuve PJ, Jiang Y, de Groh M, Fuller-Thomson E. Incident and Recurrent Depression among Adults Aged 50 Years and Older during the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Longitudinal Analysis of the Canadian Longitudinal Study on Aging. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2022; 19(22):15032. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph192215032

Chicago/Turabian Style

MacNeil, Andie, Sapriya Birk, Paul J. Villeneuve, Ying Jiang, Margaret de Groh, and Esme Fuller-Thomson. 2022. "Incident and Recurrent Depression among Adults Aged 50 Years and Older during the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Longitudinal Analysis of the Canadian Longitudinal Study on Aging" International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 19, no. 22: 15032. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph192215032

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