6.2.5. Economic Situation during a Pandemic

The self-assessment of students' economic situation in the time of pandemic was significantly related to overall emotional distress (H = 63.77, *p* < 0.001), depression (H = 51.86, *p* < 0.001), anxiety (H = 58.79, *p* < 0.001), and stress (H = 51.44, *p* < 0.001). Students who gave the answer 'stable family income, nothing has changed' had the lowest result in overall emotional distress (Me = 30.00 ± 25.43), depression (Me = 10.00 ± 10.09), anxiety (Me = 4.00 ± 7.80), and stress (Me = 14.00 ± 10.71) (Supplementary Tables S5, S5.2, S5.3, and S5.4). More than 13-fold higher odds (OR = 13.49, 95% CI: 1.71–106.33) of an increased emotional response was observed in the respondents who chose the answer that they had to start borrowing money from family or friends during the outbreak of the pandemic because they did not have sufficient funds to support themselves.

#### 6.2.6. Employment Status during a Pandemic

The employment status during the pandemic was associated with the intensity of emotions measured with DASS-21—overall emotional distress (H = 17.76, *p* < 0.001) and depression (H = 30.49, *p* < 0.001). In total DASS scores and all subscales, the sequence was similar, reaching the highest levels in the group of students who were not working (overall emotional distress—Me = 34.00 ± 29.66, depression—Me = 12.00 ± 10.47, anxietyMe = 6.00 ± 8.41, stress—Me = 16.00 ± 10.92), in later order—in a group of the respondents that were working mentally, physically, and lastly—running their own businesses. The level of overall emotional distress (Me = 34.00 ± 26.66) observed in students who were currently not working reached above the cut-off score (Supplementary Tables S6, S6.2, S6.3, and S6.4). Currently working mentally (OR = 0.5, 95% CI: 0.34–0.85) and physically (OR = 0.4, 95% CI: 0.18–1.05) were related to a 0.5 and 0.4-fold lower odds of increased overall emotional distress respectively.

#### 6.2.7. Living Situation

The living situation and the co-residence were observed to correlate with the results of the depression subscale (H = 37.22, *p* < 0.001). The highest levels of overall emotional distress (Me = 34.00 ± 25.82), depression (Me = 12.00 ± 10.32), anxiety (Me = 6.00 ± 8.18), and stress (Me = 16.00 ± 10.68) were found in a group of students living with roommates and students living with parents—overall emotional distress (Me = 34.00 ± 27.01), depression (Me = 12.00 ± 10.58), anxiety (Me = 6.00 ± 8.42), and stress (Me = 16.00 ± 11.08). People living with roommates and those living with their parents reached above the cut-off score in overall emotional distress results. The students who live with roommates presented 1.25-fold higher odds of depression, stress, and anxiety (OR = 1.25, 95% CI: 0.89–1.78) (Supplementary Tables S7, S7.2, S7.3, and S7.4).

### *6.3. Comparison with the Results of Other Authors' Studies*

The results of our study have been compared with the ones conducted in Spain, China, India, and Bangladesh. The following countries were chosen by us since the other authors applied the same psychological instrument (DASS-21) and their studies were performed during the first stages of the pandemic, similarly to our research (Table 6).

Regarding the total DASS scores, higher emotional distress was noted among Polish students compared to Chinese students (*t* = 20.44, *d* = 0.76). Polish students also showed a greater severity of depression, anxiety, and stress in comparison to Spanish students (depression—*t* = 42.31, *d* = 1.04; anxiety—*t* = 27.40, *d* = 0.68; stress *t* = 10.12, *d* = 1.20). Statistically significant results were obtained between Poland and Bangladesh, where higher levels of depression, anxiety, and stress were shown by students from Bangladesh (depression *t* = −11.35, *d* = 1.87; anxiety—*t* = −23.66, *d* = 1.07; stress *t* = −14.23, *d* = 1.91). Bangladeshi students also showed higher emotional intensity compared to Spanish students in all of the investigated subscales (depression—*t* = −60.44, *d* = 1.50; anxiety—*t* = −59.69, *d* = 0.69; stress *t* = −72.65, *d* = 1.40).


**Table 6.** The comparison of the results obtained applying the DASS-21 scale on a population of students in the studies performed in Poland, Spain, China, India, and Bangladesh.


**Table 6.** *Cont.*

ND—no data. \* collectively for severe and extremely severe. \*\* the results of the analysis of the significance of the differences for DASS total score—Poland vs. China: *t* = 20,441, *p* < 0.0001, 95% CI: 19.69 to 16.246, Cohen's *d* = 0.759 (medium). \*\*\* the results of the analysis of the significance of the differences for DASS Depression—Poland vs. Spain: *t* = 42,313, *p* < 0.0001, 95% CI: 8.914–8.125, Cohen's *d* = 1.044 (large)—Poland vs. Bangladesh: *t* = −11.351, *p* < 0.0001, 95% CI: 2.779–3.94, Cohen's *d* = 1.868 (large) Spain vs. Bangladesh: *t* = −60,438, *p* < 0.0001, 95% CI: 11.494–12.265, Cohen's *d* = 1501 (large). \*\*\* the results of the analysis of the significance of the differences for DASS Anxiety—Poland vs. Spain: *t* = 27.402, *p* < 0.0001, 95% CI: 4.682–4.057, Cohen's *d* = 0.675 (medium)—Poland vs. Bangladesh: *t* = −23.664, *p* < 0.0001, 95% CI: 5.585–6.594, Cohen's *d* = 1.072 (large)—Spain vs. Bangladesh: *t* = −59.694, *p* < 0.0001, 95% CI: 10.116–10.803, Cohen's *d* = 0.694, (medium). \*\*\* the results of the analysis of the significance of the differences for DASS Stress—Poland vs. Spain: *t* = 10.120, *p* < 0.0001, 95% CI: 10.525–9.745, Cohen's *d* = 1.197 (large)—Poland vs. Bangladesh: *t* = −14.229, *p* < 0.0001, 95% CI: 3.767–4.972, Cohen's *d* = 1.906 (large)—Spain vs. Bangladesh: *t* = −72.654, *p* < 0.0001, 95% CI: 14.099–14.881, Cohen's *d* = 1.401 (large).

### **7. The Portrait of a Student who May Potentially Require Special Psychiatric and/or Psychological Support during the Pandemic**

Based on the results of our study, the profile of a student who requires potential psychological or/and psychiatric support during the pandemic is a woman (OR = 3.01, 95% CI: 2.15–4.22), studying science (OR = 2.04, 95% CI: 0.99–4.19), living with her roommates (OR = 1.25, 95% CI: 0.89–1.78), suffering from mental disorders that appeared before the outbreak of the pandemic (OR = 5.88, 95% CI: 1.70–20.27), who was using psychiatric support before the outbreak of the pandemic (OR = 8.06, 95% CI: 2.79–23.28), complained of loneliness during the pandemic (OR = 293.31, 95% CI: 15.77–5454.92), and was in a difficult economic situation that forces her to borrow the money from the family or friends during the outbreak of the pandemic to support herself (OR = 13.49, 95% CI: 1.71–106.33).
