An 18-month follow-up of the Covid-19 psychology research consortium study panel: Survey design and fieldwork procedures for Wave 6.

OBJECTIVES: Established in March 2020, the C19PRC Study monitors the psychological and socio-economic impact of the pandemic in the UK and other countries. This paper describes the protocol for Wave 6 (August-September 2021). METHODS: The survey assessed: COVID-19 related experiences; experiences of common mental health disorders; psychological characteristics; and social and political attitudes. Adult participants from any previous wave (N = 3170) were re-invited, and sample replenishment procedures helped manage attrition. Weights were calculated using a survey raking algorithm to ensure the on-going original panel (from baseline) was nationally representative in terms of gender, age, and household income, amongst other factors. RESULTS: 1643 adults were re-interviewed at Wave 6 (51.8% retention rate). Non-participation was higher younger adults, those born outside UK, and adults living in cities. Of the adults recruited at baseline, 54.3% (N = 1100) participated in Wave 6. New respondent (N = 415) entered the panel at this wave, resulting in cross-sectional sample for Wave 6 of 2058 adults. The raking procedure re-balanced the longitudinal panel to within 1.3% of population estimates for selected socio-demographic characteristics. CONCLUSIONS: This paper outlines the growing strength of the publicly available C19PRC Study data for COVID-19-related interdisciplinary research.

Predicting resilience during the COVID-19 Pandemic in the United Kingdom: Cross-sectional and longitudinal results.

Although the COVID-19 pandemic has impacted the psychological wellbeing of some people, there is evidence that many have been much less affected. The Ecological Model of Resilience (EMR) may explain why some individuals are not resilient whilst others are. In this study we test the EMR in a comparison of UK survey data collected from the COVID-19 Psychological Research Consortium (C19PRC) longitudinal study of a representative sample of the United Kingdom (UK) adult population and data from an Italian arm of the study. We first compare data from the third wave of the UK arm of the study, collected in July/August 2020, with data from an equivalent sample and stage of the pandemic in Italy in July 2020. Next, using UK longitudinal data collected from C19PRC Waves 1, 3 and 5, collected between March 2020 and April 2021 we identify the proportion of people who were resilient. Finally, we examine which factors, drawn from the EMR, predict resilient and non-resilient outcomes. We find that the 72% of the UK sample was resilient, in line with the Italian study. In the cross-sectional logistic regression model, age and self-esteem were significantly associated with resilience whilst death anxiety thoughts, neuroticism, loneliness, and Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) symptoms related to COVID-19 were significantly associated with Non-Resilient outcomes. In the longitudinal UK analysis, at Wave 5, 80% of the sample was Resilient. Service use, belonging to wider neighbourhood, self-rated health, self-esteem, openness, and externally generated death anxiety were associated with Resilient outcomes. In contrast, PTSD symptoms and loneliness were associated with Non-Resilient outcomes. The EMR effectively explained the results. There were some variables which are amenable to intervention which could increase resilience in the face of similar future challenges.

Symptoms and levels of ICD-11 Prolonged Grief Disorder in a representative community sample of UK adults.

BACKGROUND: Prolonged Grief Disorder (PGD) is a new disorder included in ICD-11 (WHO, 2018). There is a growing body of literature surrounding the prevalence and correlates of ICD-11 PGD symptoms as assessed using various measures. This study was the first to assess levels of ICD-11 PGD symptoms as measured by the International Prolonged Grief Disorder Scale (IPGDS), a self-report scale directly aligned with the ICD-11 definition of PGD, among the United Kingdom adult general population, and identify correlates. METHOD: Participants included 2025 adults who participated in Wave 5 of the COVID-19 Psychological Research Consortium Study (C19PRC-UK). Prevalence rates of PGD were estimated based on two commonly used algorithms defined as 'strict' and 'moderate'. Sociodemographic, loss-related, and mental health correlates (i.e., anxiety, depression, mental health treatment seeking, loneliness) of strict and moderate PGD were then examined using multinomial logistic regressions. RESULTS: It was found that 2.4% (n = 43) of participants met probable caseness for PGD using the strict criteria while 7.9% (n = 140) met probable caseness for PGD using the moderate criteria. Multinomial logistic regression analysis results showed, as predicted, that income, time since bereavement, death of a child, religiosity, and depression were associated with both moderate and strict PGD. Correlates of moderate PGD included country of residence, urbanicity, younger age of bereaved, and loneliness. CONCLUSIONS: This study highlights that some symptoms of PGD are commonly reported in the general population, although relatively few meet the criteria for clinical significance. The routine assessment for PGD following a bereavement is discussed and the development of appropriate interventions are recommended.

How does the COVID-19 pandemic impact on population mental health? A network analysis of COVID influences on depression, anxiety and traumatic stress in the UK population.

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) emergency has led to numerous attempts to assess the impact of the pandemic on population mental health. The findings indicate an increase in depression and anxiety but have been limited by the lack of specificity about which aspects of the pandemic (e.g. viral exposure or economic threats) have led to adverse mental health outcomes. METHODS: Network analyses were conducted on data from wave 1 (N = 2025, recruited 23 March-28 March 2020) and wave 2 (N = 1406, recontacts 22 April-1 May 2020) of the COVID-19 Psychological Research Consortium Study, an online longitudinal survey of a representative sample of the UK adult population. Our models included depression (PHQ-9), generalized anxiety (GAD-7) and trauma symptoms (ITQ); and measures of COVID-specific anxiety, exposure to the virus in self and close others, as well as economic loss due to the pandemic. RESULTS: A mixed graphical model at wave 1 identified a potential pathway from economic adversity to anxiety symptoms via COVID-specific anxiety. There was no association between viral exposure and symptoms. Ising network models using clinical cut-offs for symptom scores at each wave yielded similar findings, with the exception of a modest effect of viral exposure on trauma symptoms at wave 1 only. Anxiety and depression symptoms formed separate clusters at wave 1 but not wave 2. CONCLUSIONS: The psychological impact of the pandemic evolved in the early phase of lockdown. COVID-related anxiety may represent the mechanism through which economic consequences of the pandemic are associated with psychiatric symptoms.

Refuting the myth of a 'tsunami' of mental ill-health in populations affected by COVID-19: evidence that response to the pandemic is heterogeneous, not homogeneous.

BACKGROUND: The current study argues that population prevalence estimates for mental health disorders, or changes in mean scores over time, may not adequately reflect the heterogeneity in mental health response to the COVID-19 pandemic within the population. METHODS: The COVID-19 Psychological Research Consortium (C19PRC) Study is a longitudinal, nationally representative, online survey of UK adults. The current study analysed data from its first three waves of data collection: Wave 1 (March 2020, N = 2025), Wave 2 (April 2020, N = 1406) and Wave 3 (July 2020, N = 1166). Anxiety-depression was measured using the Patient Health Questionnaire Anxiety and Depression Scale (a composite measure of the PHQ-9 and GAD-7) and COVID-19-related posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) with the International Trauma Questionnaire. Changes in mental health outcomes were modelled across the three waves. Latent class growth analysis was used to identify subgroups of individuals with different trajectories of change in anxiety-depression and COVID-19 PTSD. Latent class membership was regressed on baseline characteristics. RESULTS: Overall prevalence of anxiety-depression remained stable, while COVID-19 PTSD reduced between Waves 2 and 3. Heterogeneity in mental health response was found, and hypothesised classes reflecting (i) stability, (ii) improvement and (iii) deterioration in mental health were identified. Psychological factors were most likely to differentiate the improving, deteriorating and high-stable classes from the low-stable mental health trajectories. CONCLUSIONS: A low-stable profile characterised by little-to-no psychological distress ('resilient' class) was the most common trajectory for both anxiety-depression and COVID-19 PTSD. Monitoring these trajectories is necessary moving forward, in particular for the ~30% of individuals with increasing anxiety-depression levels.

Perceived manageability of debt and mental health during the COVID-19 pandemic: A UK population analysis.

OBJECTIVES: This study examined the association between perceived manageability of debt and risk of depression, anxiety, and mental health help-seeking among a nationally representative sample of adults living in the United Kingdom (UK). METHODS: Data was derived from the COVID-19 Psychological Research Consortium (C19PRC) Study Wave 6 (August/September 2021) which examined the psychological, social, and economic effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on the UK adult population. Bivariate and logistic regression analyses were conducted to determine the association between different levels of perceived debt manageability (i.e., "easily manageable", "some problems", "quite serious problems", "very serious problems", "cannot manage at all") and mental health related outcomes. RESULTS: Almost a quarter of the sample (24%, n = 494) reported debt management problems, and debt manageability associated with higher levels of anxiety, depression, and mental health help-seeking. After adjusting for demographic variables (e.g. income, receipt of benefits), logistic regression analysis demonstrated a dose-response association between increasing levels of debt manageability problems and mental health outcomes. Specifically, adjusted odds ratios for anxiety ranged from 2.28 ('some problems') to 11.18 ('very serious problems'), for depression ranged from 2.80 ('some problems') to 16.21 ('cannot manage at all'), and for mental health help-seeking ranged from 1.69 ('some problems') to 3.18 ('quite serious problems', 'very serious problems'). CONCLUSION: This study highlights that debt manageability problems represent a robust predictor of depression, anxiety, and mental-health help seeking.

The role of psychosocial factors in explaining sex differences in major depression and generalized anxiety during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Understanding how pandemics differentially impact on the socio-protective and psychological outcomes of males and females is important to develop more equitable public health policies. We assessed whether males and females differed on measures of major depression and generalized anxiety during the COVID-19 the pandemic, and if so, which sociodemographic, pandemic, and psychological variables may affect sex differences in depression and anxiety. METHODS: Participants were a nationally representative sample of Irish adults (N = 1,032) assessed between April 30th to May 19th, 2020, during Ireland's first COVID-19 nationwide quarantine. Participants completed self-report measures of anxiety (GAD-7) and depression (PHQ-9), as well as 23 sociodemographic pandemic-related, and psychological variables. Sex differences on measures of depression and anxiety were assessed using binary logistic regression analysis and differences in sociodemographic, pandemic, and psychological variables assessed using chi-square tests of independence and independent samples t-tests. RESULTS: Females were significantly more likely than males to screen positive for major depressive disorder (30.6% vs. 20.7%; χ2 (1) = 13.26, p < .001, OR = 1.69 [95% CI = 1.27, 2.25]), and generalised anxiety disorder (23.3% vs. 14.4%; χ2 (1) = 13.42, p < .001, OR = 1.81 [95% CI = 1.31, 2.49]). When adjusted for all other sex-varying covariates however, sex was no longer significantly associated with screening positive for depression (AOR = 0.80, 95% CI = 0.51, 1.25) or GAD (AOR = 0.97, 95% CI = 0.60, 1.57). CONCLUSION: Observed sex-differences in depression and anxiety during the COVID-19 pandemic in the Republic of Ireland are best explained by psychosocial factors of COVID-19 related anxiety, trait neuroticism, lower sleep quality, higher levels of loneliness, greater somatic problems, and, in the case of depression, increases in childcaring responsibilities and lower trait consciousnesses. Implications of these findings for public health policy and interventions are discussed.

Measurement invariance of the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) and Generalized Anxiety Disorder scale (GAD-7) across four European countries during the COVID-19 pandemic

Background: The Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) and Generalized Anxiety Disorder scale (GAD-7) are self-report measures of major depressive disorder and generalised anxiety disorder. The primary aim of this study was to test for differential item functioning (DIF) on the PHQ-9 and GAD-7 items based on age, sex (males and females), and country. Method: Data from nationally representative surveys in UK, Ireland, Spain, and Italy (combined N = 6,054) were used to fit confirmatory factor analytic and multiple-indictor multiple-causes models. Results: Spain and Italy had higher latent variable means than the UK and Ireland for both anxiety and depression, but there was no evidence for differential items functioning. Conclusions: The PHQ-9 and GAD-7 scores were found to be unidimensional, reliable, and largely free of DIF in data from four large nationally representative samples of the general population in the UK, Ireland, Italy and Spain. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved)

State of Ireland's mental health: findings from a nationally representative survey.

AIMS: Current information about the prevalence of various mental health disorders in the general adult population of the Republic of Ireland is lacking. In this study, we examined the prevalence of 12 common mental disorders, the proportion of adults who screened positive for any disorder, the sociodemographic factors associated with meeting criteria for a disorder and the associations between each disorder and history of attempted suicide. METHODS: A non-probability nationally representative sample (N = 1110) of adults living in Ireland completed self-report measures of 12 mental health disorders. Effect sizes were calculated using odds ratios from logistic regression models, and population attributable risk fractions (PAFs) were estimated to quantify the associations between each disorder and attempted suicide. RESULTS: Prevalence rates ranged from 15.0% (insomnia disorder) to 1.7% (histrionic personality disorder). Overall, 42.5% of the sample met criteria for a mental health disorder, and 11.1% had a lifetime history of attempted suicide. Younger age, being a shift worker and trauma exposure were independently associated with a higher likelihood of having a mental health disorder, while being in university was associated with a lower likelihood of having a disorder. ICD-11 complex posttraumatic stress disorder, borderline personality disorder and insomnia disorder had the highest PAFs for attempted suicide. CONCLUSIONS: Mental health disorder prevalence in Ireland is relatively high compared to international estimates. The findings are discussed in relation to important mental health policy implications.

Tracking the psychological and socio-economic impact of the COVID-19 pandemic in the UK: A methodological report from Wave 5 of the COVID-19 Psychological Research Consortium (C19PRC) Study.

OBJECTIVES: The COVID-19 Psychological Research Consortium (C19PRC) Study was established in March 2020 to monitor the psychological and socio-economic impact of the pandemic in the UK and other countries. This paper describes the protocol for Wave 5 (March-April 2021). METHODS: The survey assessed: COVID-19 related experiences; experiences of common mental health disorders; psychological characteristics; and social and political attitudes. Adults who participated in any previous wave (N = 4949) were re-invited to participate. Weights were calculated using a survey raking algorithm to ensure the longitudinal panel was nationally representative in terms of gender, age, and household income, amongst other factors. RESULTS: Overall, 2520 adults participated. A total of 2377 adults who participated in the previous survey wave (November-December 2020) were re-interviewed at Wave 5 (61.5% retention rate). Attrition between these two waves was predicted by younger age, lower household income, children living in the household, and treatment for mental health difficulties. Of the adults recruited into the C19PRC study at baseline, 57.4% (N = 1162) participated in Wave 5. The raking procedure re-balanced the longitudinal panel to within 1.5% of population estimates for selected socio-demographic characteristics. CONCLUSION: This paper outlines the growing strength of the publicly available C19PRC Study data for COVID-19-related interdisciplinary research.

How is loneliness related to anxiety and depression: A population-based network analysis in the early lockdown period.

High risk of mental health problems is associated with loneliness resulting from social distancing measures and "lockdowns" that have been imposed globally due to the COVID-19 pandemic. This study explores the interconnectedness of loneliness, anxiety and depression on a symptom level using network analysis. A representative sample of participants (N = 1041), who were of at least 18 years of age, was recruited from the Republic of Ireland (ROI). Loneliness, anxiety and depression were assessed using validated instruments. Network analysis was used to identify the network structure of loneliness, anxiety and depression. Loneliness was found to be largely isolated from anxiety and depression nodes in the network. Anxiety and depression were largely interconnected. "Trouble relaxing," "feeling bad about oneself" and "not being able to stop or control worrying" were suggested as the most influential nodes of the network. Despite the expectation that loneliness would be implicated more robustly in the anxiety and depression network of symptoms, the results suggest loneliness as a distinct construct that is not interwoven with anxiety and depression.

A network approach to understanding social distancing behaviour during the first UK lockdown of the COVID-19 pandemic.

OBJECTIVE: Given the highly infectious nature of COVID-19, social distancing practices are key in stemming the spread of the virus. We aimed to assess the complex interplay among psychological factors, socio-demographic characteristics and social distancing behaviours within the framework of the widely used Capability, Opportunity, Motivation-Behaviour (COM-B) model. DESIGN: The present research employed network psychometrics on data collected during the first UK lockdown in April 2020 as part of the COVID-19 Psychological Research Consortium (C19PRC) Study. Using a network approach, we examined the predictions of psychological and demographic variables onto social distancing practices at two levels of analysis: macro and micro. RESULTS: Our findings revealed several factors that influenced social distancing behaviour during the first UK lockdown. The COM-B model was successful in predicting particular aspects of social-distancing via the influence of psychological capability and motivation at the macro-and micro-levels, respectively. Notably, demographic variables, such as education, income, and age, were directly and uniquely predictive of certain social distancing behaviours. CONCLUSION: Our findings reveal psychological factors that are key predictors of social distancing behaviour and also illustrate how demographic variables directly influence such behaviour. Our research has implications for the design of empirically-driven interventions to promote adherence to social distancing practices in this and future pandemics.

Testing both affordability-availability and psychological-coping mechanisms underlying changes in alcohol use during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Two theoretical perspectives have been proffered to explain changes in alcohol use during the pandemic: the 'affordability-availability' mechanism (i.e., drinking decreases due to changes in physical availability and/or reduced disposable income) and the 'psychological-coping' mechanism (i.e., drinking increases as adults attempt to cope with pandemic-related distress). We tested these alternative perspectives via longitudinal analyses of the COVID-19 Psychological Consortium (C19PRC) Study data (spanning three timepoints during March to July 2020). Respondents provided data on psychological measures (e.g., anxiety, depression, posttraumatic stress, paranoia, extraversion, neuroticism, death anxiety, COVID-19 anxiety, intolerance of uncertainty, resilience), changes in socio-economic circumstances (e.g., income loss, reduced working hours), drinking motives, solitary drinking, and 'at-risk' drinking (assessed using a modified version of the AUDIT-C). Structural equation modelling was used to determine (i) whether 'at-risk' drinking during the pandemic differed from that recalled before the pandemic, (ii) dimensions of drinking motives and the psychosocial correlates of these dimensions, (iii) if increased alcohol consumption was predicted by drinking motives, solitary drinking, and socio-economic changes. The proportion of adults who recalled engaging in 'at-risk' drinking decreased significantly from 35.9% pre-pandemic to 32.0% during the pandemic. Drinking to cope was uniquely predicted by experiences of anxiety and/or depression and low resilience levels. Income loss or reduced working hours were not associated with coping, social enhancement, or conformity drinking motives, nor changes in drinking during lockdown. In the earliest stage of the pandemic, psychological-coping mechanisms may have been a stronger driver to changes in adults' alcohol use than 'affordability-availability' alone.

Sharing data to better understand one of the world's most significant shared experiences: data resource profile of the longitudinal COVID-19 psychological research consortium (C19PRC) study.

This paper serves to alert IJPDS readers to the availability of a major new longitudinal survey data resource, the COVID-19 Psychological Research Consortium (C19PRC) Study, which is being released for secondary use via the Open Science Framework. The C19PRC Study is a rich and detailed dataset that provides a convenient and valuable foundation from which to study the social, political, and health status of European adults during an unprecedented time of change as a direct result of the COVID-19 pandemic and Brexit. Here, we provide an overview of the C19PRC Study design, with the purpose of stimulating interest about the study among social scientists and maximising use of this resource.

Measurement invariance of the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) and Generalized Anxiety Disorder scale (GAD-7) across four European countries during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: The Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) and Generalized Anxiety Disorder scale (GAD-7) are self-report measures of major depressive disorder and generalised anxiety disorder. The primary aim of this study was to test for differential item functioning (DIF) on the PHQ-9 and GAD-7 items based on age, sex (males and females), and country. METHOD: Data from nationally representative surveys in UK, Ireland, Spain, and Italy (combined N = 6,054) were used to fit confirmatory factor analytic and multiple-indictor multiple-causes models. RESULTS: Spain and Italy had higher latent variable means than the UK and Ireland for both anxiety and depression, but there was no evidence for differential items functioning. CONCLUSIONS: The PHQ-9 and GAD-7 scores were found to be unidimensional, reliable, and largely free of DIF in data from four large nationally representative samples of the general population in the UK, Ireland, Italy and Spain.

Understanding the lived experiences of healthcare professionals during the COVID-19 pandemic: an interpretative phenomenological analysis Comprendiendo las experiencias vividas de los profesionales de la salud durante la pandemia de COVID-19: un análisis fenomenológico interpretativo 了解COVID-19疫情期间医护人员的亲身经历：一项解释性现象学分析

Background: Little research has examined the impact of working within the context of COVID-19 on UK healthcare professionals (HCPs) mental health and well-being, despite previous pandemic findings indicating that HCPs are particularly vulnerable to suffering PTSD and other mental health difficulties due to the nature of healthcare work. Specifically, it appears that no research has employed qualitative methodologies to explore the effects of working amidst COVID-19 on mental health for HCPs in the UK. Objective: To qualitatively examining the lived experiences of HCPs in Northern Ireland, working during the early stages of the pandemic and lockdown period (14.04.20 and 29.04.20). Method: Interpretative phenomenological analysis (IPA) was used to explore the experiences of healthcare professionals, who were working during the COVID-19 outbreak. Ten HCPs were recruited via a social media campaign and snowball sampling. All interviews were conducted via telephone and transcribed verbatim. Results: Three superordinate themes with subordinate themes were elicited through the analysis. Theme one centred on specific challenges of HCPs working during the pandemic, such as redeployment, isolation from loved ones, infection concerns, lack of PPE and impact on patient interpersonal care. Theme two offered insights into the mental health and wellbeing of HCPs, while many experienced feelings of fear, sadness and hypervigilance, all also demonstrated a marked resilience. Finally, many felt undervalued and misunderstood, and wished to press upon the general public seriousness of the disease. Conclusion: To the authors’ knowledge this is the first study to explore in depth, the unique experiences of frontline HCPs in Northern Ireland, offering a detailed account of the challenges confronted in these unprecedented circumstances and highlighting support needs within this cohort. HIGHLIGHTS The current study qualitatively examines the experiences of frontline healthcare professionals working during the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic in the UK. Three superordinate themes with subordinate themes emerged from the analysis, broadly covering key areas such as navigating new occupational challenges, maintaining mental health and wellbeing under precedented circumstances, and managing feelings being misunderstood and undervalued. Specific challenges included sudden redeployment, resulting often in a change in job role (and/or location) as well as a loss of important work related social networks because of this, isolation from loved ones, infection concerns, lack of (or limited supply of) personal protection equipment and impact on patient interpersonal care. The findings suggest that being a healthcare professional during this time does not come without personal cost and has the potential to put pressure on one’s psychological state, with many participants experienced feelings of fear, sadness and hypervigilance, as well as physical exhaustion. All participants demonstrated a marked resilience in their ability to continue to do navigate their work environment and were able to employ adaptive coping strategies however, some expressed concern that this is waning. It is essential that we do not neglect a workforce which is working tirelessly at great personal cost to keep each one of us safe and support the continued wellbeing and resilience of healthcare professionals. It is argued that in order to adequately support healthcare professionals physical and mental health we must tackle this on three main fronts, at a Government level, a research and intervention level and at a societal level.

Modelling the complexity of pandemic-related lifestyle quality change and mental health: an analysis of a nationally representative UK general population sample.

PURPOSE: The COVID-19 pandemic has affected the way many individuals go about their daily lives. This study attempted to model the complexity of change in lifestyle quality as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic and its context within the UK adult population. METHODS: Data from the COVID-19 Psychological Research Consortium Study (Wave 3, July 2020; N = 1166) were utilised. A measure of COVID-19-related lifestyle change captured how individuals' lifestyle quality had been altered as a consequence of the pandemic. Exploratory factor analysis and latent profile analysis were used to identify distinct lifestyle quality change subgroups, while multinomial logistic regression analysis was employed to describe class membership. RESULTS: Five lifestyle dimensions, reflecting partner relationships, health, family and friend relations, personal and social activities, and work life, were identified by the EFA, and seven classes characterised by distinct patterns of change across these dimensions emerged from the LPA: (1) better overall (3.3%), (2) worse except partner relations (6.0%), (3) worse overall (2.5%), (4) better relationships (9.5%), (5) better except partner relations (4.3%), (6) no different (67.9%), and (7) worse partner relations only (6.5%). Predictor variables differentiated membership of classes. Notably, classes 3 and 7 were associated with poorer mental health (COVID-19 related PTSD and suicidal ideation). CONCLUSIONS: Four months into the pandemic, most individuals' lifestyle quality remained largely unaffected by the crisis. Concerningly however, a substantial minority (15%) experienced worsened lifestyles compared to before the pandemic. In particular, a pronounced deterioration in partner relations seemed to constitute the more severe pandemic-related lifestyle change.

Detecting and describing stability and change in COVID-19 vaccine receptibility in the United Kingdom and Ireland.

COVID-19 continues to pose a threat to global public health. Multiple safe and effective vaccines against COVID-19 are available with one-third of the global population now vaccinated. Achieving a sufficient level of vaccine coverage to suppress COVID-19 requires, in part, sufficient acceptance among the public. However, relatively high rates of hesitance and resistance to COVID-19 vaccination persists, threating public health efforts to achieve vaccine-induced population protection. In this study, we examined longitudinal changes in COVID-19 vaccine acceptance, hesitance, and resistance in two nations (the United Kingdom and the Republic of Ireland) during the first nine months of the pandemic, and identified individual and psychological factors associated with consistent non-acceptance of COVID-19 vaccination. Using nationally representative, longitudinal data from the United Kingdom (UK; N = 2025) and Ireland (N = 1041), we found that (1) COVID-19 vaccine acceptance declined in the UK and remained unchanged in Ireland following the emergence of approved vaccines; (2) multiple subgroups existed reflecting people who were consistently willing to be vaccinated ('Accepters': 68% in the UK and 61% in Ireland), consistently unwilling to be vaccinated ('Deniers': 12% in the UK and 16% in Ireland), and who fluctuated over time ('Moveable Middle': 20% in the UK and 23% in Ireland); and (3) the 'deniers' and 'moveable middle' were distinguishable from the 'accepters' on a range of individual (e.g., younger, low income, living alone) and psychological (e.g., distrust of scientists and doctors, conspiracy mindedness) factors. The use of two high-income, Western European nations limits the generalizability of these findings. Nevertheless, understanding how receptibility to COVID-19 vaccination changes as the pandemic unfolds, and the factors that distinguish and characterise those that are hesitant and resistant to vaccination is helpful for public health efforts to achieve vaccine-induced population protection against COVID-19.

Design, content, and fieldwork procedures of the COVID-19 Psychological Research Consortium (C19PRC) Study - Wave 4.

OBJECTIVES: This paper outlines fieldwork procedures for Wave 4 of the COVID-19 Psychological Research Consortium (C19PRC) Study in the UK during November-December 2020. METHODS: Respondents provided data on socio-political attitudes, beliefs, and behaviours, and mental health disorders (anxiety, depression, and posttraumatic stress). In Phase 1, adults (N = 2878) were reinvited to participate. At Phase 2, new recruitment: (i) replenished the longitudinal strand to account for attrition; and (ii) oversampled from the devolved UK nations to facilitate robust between-country analyses for core study outcomes. Weights were calculated using a survey raking algorithm to ensure the longitudinal panel was representative of the baseline sample characteristics. RESULTS: In Phase 1, 1796 adults were successfully recontacted and provided full interviews at Wave 4 (62.4% retention rate). In Phase 2, 292 new respondents were recruited to replenish the panel, as well as 1779 adults from Wales, Scotland, and Northern Ireland, who were representative of the socio-political composition of the adult populations in these nations. The raking procedure successfully re-balanced the longitudinal panel to within 1% of population estimates for selected socio-demographic characteristics. CONCLUSION: The C19PRC Study offers a unique opportunity to facilitate and stimulate interdisciplinary research addressing important public health questions relating to the COVID-19 pandemic.