Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 15 de 15
Filter
1.
Wellcome Open Res ; 7: 64, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2302106

ABSTRACT

Background: Concerns have been raised about the potential impact of COVID-19 and associated lockdown measures on child mental wellbeing, but emerging evidence suggests mixed results and there is a dearth of information from ethnically diverse samples. The current study aims to explore the impact of the pandemic on wellbeing using longitudinal data collected from the multi-ethnic Born in Bradford family cohort study. Methods: Within-child changes in wellbeing were explored using data collected pre-pandemic and again during the first UK lockdown for 500 children aged 7-13 from a range of ethnic and socioeconomic backgrounds, using self-reported feelings of happiness and sadness. Associations between changes in wellbeing, demographic factors, quality of social relationships and physical activity levels were explored using multinomial logistic regression models. Results: In this sample, 55% of children reported no change in their wellbeing from pre-pandemic to during the first lockdown (n=264). Children of Pakistani heritage were more than twice as likely to report feeling sad less often than White British children (RRR: 2.61, 95% CI: 1.23, 5.51) during the first lockdown, and those who reported being left out by other children before the pandemic were over three times as likely than those who did not (RRR: 3.72: 1.51, 9.20) to report feeling sad less often during the pandemic. Around a third of children reported feeling happier (n=152, 31.6%), but these changes did not relate to any of the explanatory variables included in this analysis. Conclusion: Many children in this study reported no changes in their wellbeing during the first UK lockdown compared to before the pandemic and some described improved wellbeing. These findings suggest that children have coped well with the significant changes over the past year, though targeted support, particularly for those children who felt excluded before the pandemic, would be beneficial.

2.
Wellcome open research ; 7, 2022.
Article in English | EuropePMC | ID: covidwho-2277162

ABSTRACT

Background: Concerns have been raised about the potential impact of COVID-19 and associated lockdown measures on child mental wellbeing, but emerging evidence suggests mixed results and there is a dearth of information from ethnically diverse samples. The current study aims to explore the impact of the pandemic on wellbeing using longitudinal data collected from the multi-ethnic Born in Bradford family cohort study. Methods: Within-child changes in wellbeing were explored using data collected pre-pandemic and again during the first UK lockdown for 500 children aged 7-13 from a range of ethnic and socioeconomic backgrounds, using self-reported feelings of happiness and sadness. Associations between changes in wellbeing, demographic factors, quality of social relationships and physical activity levels were explored using multinomial logistic regression models. Results: In this sample, 55% of children reported no change in their wellbeing from pre-pandemic to during the first lockdown (n=264). Children of Pakistani heritage were more than twice as likely to report feeling sad less often than White British children (RRR: 2.61, 95% CI: 1.23, 5.51) during the first lockdown. Those who reported being left out by other children before the pandemic were over three times as likely than those who did not (RRR: 3.72: 1.51, 9.20) to report feeling sad less often during the pandemic. Around a third of children reported feeling happier (n=152, 31.6%), but these changes did not relate to any of the explanatory variables included in this analysis. Conclusion: Many children in this study reported no changes in their wellbeing during the first UK lockdown compared to before the pandemic and some described improved wellbeing. These findings suggest that children have coped well with the significant changes over the past year, though targeted support, particularly for those children who felt excluded before the pandemic, would be beneficial.

3.
Wellcome open research ; 7:64, 2022.
Article in English | EuropePMC | ID: covidwho-2277161

ABSTRACT

Background: Concerns have been raised about the potential impact of COVID-19 and associated lockdown measures on child mental wellbeing, but emerging evidence suggests mixed results and there is a dearth of information from ethnically diverse samples. The current study aims to explore the impact of the pandemic on wellbeing using longitudinal data collected from the multi-ethnic Born in Bradford family cohort study. Methods: Within-child changes in wellbeing were explored using data collected pre-pandemic and again during the first UK lockdown for 500 children aged 7-13 from a range of ethnic and socioeconomic backgrounds, using self-reported feelings of happiness and sadness. Associations between changes in wellbeing, demographic factors, quality of social relationships and physical activity levels were explored using multinomial logistic regression models. Results: In this sample, 55% of children reported no change in their wellbeing from pre-pandemic to during the first lockdown (n=264). Children of Pakistani heritage were more than twice as likely to report feeling sad less often than White British children (RRR: 2.61, 95% CI: 1.23, 5.51) during the first lockdown, and those who reported being left out by other children before the pandemic were over three times as likely than those who did not (RRR: 3.72: 1.51, 9.20) to report feeling sad less often during the pandemic. Around a third of children reported feeling happier (n=152, 31.6%), but these changes did not relate to any of the explanatory variables included in this analysis. Conclusion: Many children in this study reported no changes in their wellbeing during the first UK lockdown compared to before the pandemic and some described improved wellbeing. These findings suggest that children have coped well with the significant changes over the past year, though targeted support, particularly for those children who felt excluded before the pandemic, would be beneficial.

4.
Wellcome Open Res ; 2022.
Article in English | EuropePMC | ID: covidwho-2056411

ABSTRACT

Background: The Born in Bradford’s Better Start (BiBBS) interventional birth cohort study was designed as an innovative cohort platform for efficient evaluation of early life interventions delivered through the Better Start Bradford programme. There are a growing number of interventional cohorts being implemented internationally. This paper provides an interim analysis of BiBBS in order to share learning about the feasibility and value of this method. Methods: : Recruitment began in January 2016 and will complete in December 2023 with a target sample of 5,000 pregnancies. An interim data cut was completed for all pregnancies recruited between January 2016 and November 2019 with an expected due date between 1 st April 2016 and 8 th March 2020. Descriptive statistics were completed on the data. Results: : Of 4,823 eligible pregnancies, 2,626 (54%) pregnancies were recruited, resulting in 2,392 mothers and 2,501 children. The sample are representative of the pregnant population (61% Pakistani heritage;12% White British;8% other South Asian and 6% Central and Eastern European ethnicity). The majority of participants (84%) live in the lowest decile of the Index of Multiple Deprivation, and many live in vulnerable circumstances. A high proportion (85%) of BiBBS families have engaged in one or more of the Better Start Bradford interventions. Levels of participation varied by the characteristics of the interventions, such as the requirement for active participation and the length of commitment to a programme. Conclusions: :  We have demonstrated the feasibility of recruiting an interventional cohort that includes seldom heard families from ethnic minority and deprived backgrounds. The high level of uptake of interventions is encouraging for the goal of evaluating the process and outcomes of multiple early life interventions using the innovative interventional cohort approach. BiBBS covers a period before, during and after the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic which adds scientific value to the cohort.

5.
Health Expect ; 25(4): 1619-1632, 2022 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1961577

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: British Pakistani women have exceptionally high rates of obesity and yet are seldom heard in a research priority setting concerning weight management. The objectives of this study were (i) to ascertain what multisectoral professionals perceive to be the most pressing unmet obesity needs or topic areas that need more research in relation to Pakistani women living in deprived areas of Bradford and (ii) to determine the top 10 obesity health priorities for this group to develop an obesity research agenda. METHODS: A two-step process was adopted using the following: (i) a survey of a wide range of multisectoral professional stakeholders (n = 159) and (ii) a ranking exercise involving Pakistani women living in deprived areas of Bradford (n = 32) to select and prioritize their top 10 obesity health concerns and unmet needs from a list of 31 statements identified in the survey and previous research. Survey data were analysed using inductive content analysis and themes were identified. Themes were translated into statements to be ranked by Pakistani women. The ranking exercise was conducted by telephone either via voice or video call. Data were analysed using a reverse scoring system. RESULTS: Survey responses were grouped into statements reflecting the following three categories: education needs; healthy behaviour barriers and mental well-being. The highest rankings were given by Pakistani women to statements on mental health and the need for education. The top 10 prioritized statements were developed with members of the public into an obesity research agenda that reflected the target population. CONCLUSION: Actively engaging British Pakistani women in setting research priorities provided a unique opportunity to understand the key areas they think are important for future research. The culminating research agenda can be used by researchers to advance the field of obesity research in Pakistani communities, thus producing research outputs that are relevant to and have impact in this population. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: Participants in the ranking exercise collected data. Public contributors were involved in developing the prioritized statements into a research agenda.


Subject(s)
Health Priorities , Health Services Needs and Demand , Health Services Research , Obesity , Poverty Areas , Social Determinants of Health , Biomedical Research/methods , Biomedical Research/organization & administration , Female , Health Care Surveys , Health Priorities/organization & administration , Health Services Research/methods , Health Services Research/organization & administration , Humans , Intersectoral Collaboration , Obesity/epidemiology , Obesity/therapy , Pakistan/ethnology , Social Determinants of Health/statistics & numerical data , Stakeholder Participation , United Kingdom/epidemiology
7.
BMJ Open ; 12(6): e049416, 2022 06 30.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1909749

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To describe the prevalence of factors related to well-being among primary school children in a deprived multiethnic community in the UK. DESIGN AND PARTICIPANTS: Cross-sectional survey of 15 641 children aged 7-10 years in Born in Bradford's Primary School Years study: whole-classroom samples in 89 Bradford primary schools between 2016 and 2019. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Prevalence estimates by ethnicity (%, 95% CI) of single and multiple vulnerabilities in child well-being within and across four domains (Home, Family, Relationships; Material Resources; Friends and School; Subjective Well-being). RESULTS: Only 10% of children had no vulnerabilities in any domain of well-being; 10% had one or more vulnerabilities in all four domains. The highest prevalence estimates were for being bullied some or all of the time (52.7%, 95% CI: 51.9% to 53.4%), keeping worries to oneself (31.2%, 95% CI: 30.5% to 31.9%), having no park near home (30.8%, 95% CI: 30.1% to 31.5%) and worrying all the time about how much money their family has (26.3%, 95% CI: 25.6% to 27%). Boys were consistently significantly more likely than girls to report all of the vulnerabilities in the Home, Family and Family Relationships domain, and the majority of indicators in the other domains, and in all domains except Friends and School, boys were significantly more likely to have at least one vulnerability. Girls were significantly more likely to report not having many friends (16.7%, 95% CI: 15.9% to 17.6% vs 12.5%, 95% CI: 11.8% to 13.2%), being bullied some or all of the time (55.8%, 95% CI: 54.7% to 56.9% vs 49.7%, 95% CI: 48.6% to 50.8%) and feeling left out all the time (12.1%, 95% CI: 11.4% to 12.8%) versus (10.3%, 95% CI: 9.7% to 11.0%). Variations in vulnerabilities by ethnicity were complex, with children in black, Asian and minority ethnic groups sometimes reporting more vulnerabilities and sometimes fewer than white British children. For example, compared with children of Pakistani heritage, white British children were more likely to say that their family never gets along well (6.3%, 95% CI: 5.6% to 7.1% vs 4.1%, 95% CI: 3.6% to 4.6%) and to have no access to the internet at home (22.3%, 95% CI: 21% to 23.6% vs 18%, 95% CI: 17% to 18.9%). Children with Pakistani heritage were more likely than white British children to say they had no park near their home where they can play with friends (32.7%, 95% CI: 31.6% to 33.9% vs 29.9%, 95% CI: 28.6% to 31.3%), to report not having three meals a day (17.9%, 95% CI: 16.9% to 18.8% vs 11.9%, 95% CI: 10.9% to 12.9%) and to worry all the time about how much money their families have (29.3%, 95% CI: 28.2% to 30.3%) vs (21.6%, 95% CI: 20.4% to 22.9%). Gypsy/Irish Traveller children were less likely than white British children to say they were bullied some or all of the time (42.2%, 95% CI: 35.4% to 49.4% vs 53.8%, 95% CI: 52.3% to 55.3%), but more likely to say they were mean to others all the time (9.9%, 95% CI: 6.3% to 15.2% vs 4%, 95% CI: 3.5% to 4.7%) and can never work out what to do when things are hard (15.2%, 95% CI: 10.6% to 21.2% vs 9%, 95% CI: 8.2% to 9.9%). We considered six vulnerabilities to be of particular concern during the COVID-19 pandemic and associated national and local lockdowns: family never gets along well together; no garden where child can play; no nearby park where they can play; not having three meals a day; no internet at home; worried about money all the time. Pre-pandemic, 37.4% (95% CI: 36.6% to 38.3%) of Bradford children had one of these vulnerabilities and a further 29.6% (95% CI: 28.9% to 30.4%) had more than one. CONCLUSIONS: Although most primary school children aged 7-10 in our study had good levels of well-being on most indicators across multiple domains, fewer than 10% had no vulnerabilities at all, a worrying 10% had at least one vulnerability in all the four domains we studied and two-thirds had vulnerabilities of particular concern during the COVID-19 lockdowns.


Subject(s)
Child Health , Mental Health , COVID-19 , Child , Communicable Disease Control , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Humans , Male , Pandemics , Schools , United Kingdom/epidemiology
8.
Nat Commun ; 13(1): 3528, 2022 06 28.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1908168

ABSTRACT

The frequency of, and risk factors for, long COVID are unclear among community-based individuals with a history of COVID-19. To elucidate the burden and possible causes of long COVID in the community, we coordinated analyses of survey data from 6907 individuals with self-reported COVID-19 from 10 UK longitudinal study (LS) samples and 1.1 million individuals with COVID-19 diagnostic codes in electronic healthcare records (EHR) collected by spring 2021. Proportions of presumed COVID-19 cases in LS reporting any symptoms for 12+ weeks ranged from 7.8% and 17% (with 1.2 to 4.8% reporting debilitating symptoms). Increasing age, female sex, white ethnicity, poor pre-pandemic general and mental health, overweight/obesity, and asthma were associated with prolonged symptoms in both LS and EHR data, but findings for other factors, such as cardio-metabolic parameters, were inconclusive.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Electronic Health Records , COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/epidemiology , Female , Humans , Longitudinal Studies , Risk Factors , Surveys and Questionnaires , United Kingdom/epidemiology , Post-Acute COVID-19 Syndrome
9.
BMJ Open ; 12(1): e047748, 2022 01 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1622050

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: To explore clinically important increases in depression/anxiety from before to during the first UK COVID-19 lockdown and factors related to this change, with a particular focus on ethnic differences. DESIGN: Pre-COVID-19 and lockdown surveys nested within two longitudinal Born in Bradford cohort studies. PARTICIPANTS: 1860 mothers with a child aged 0-5 or 9-13, 48% Pakistani heritage. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: ORs for a clinically important increase (5 points or more) in depression (eight item Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-8)) and anxiety (Generalised Anxiety Disorder Assessment (GAD-7)) in unadjusted regression analyses, repeated with exposures of interest separated by ethnicity to look for differences in magnitude of associations, and lived experience of mothers captured in open text questions. RESULTS: The number of women reporting clinically important depression/anxiety increased from 11% to 20% (95% CI 10%-13%; 18%-22%) and from 10% to 16% (95% CI 8%-11%; 15%-18%), respectively. Increases in depression/anxiety were associated with loneliness (OR=8.37, 95% CI 5.70 to 12.27; 8.50, 95% CI 5.71 to 12.65, respectively); financial (6.23, 95% CI 3.96 to 9.80; 6.03, 95% CI 3.82 to 9.51), food (3.33, 95% CI 2.09 to 5.28; 3.46, 95% CI 2.15 to 5.58) and housing insecurity (3.29, 95% CI 2.36 to 4.58; 3.0, 95% CI 2.11 to 4.25); a lack of physical activity (3.13, 95% CI 2.15 to 4.56; 2.55, 95% CI 1.72 to 3.78); and a poor partner relationship (3.6, 95% CI 2.44 to 5.43; 5.1, 95% CI 3.37 to 7.62). The magnitude of associations between key exposures and worsening mental health varied between ethnic groups.Responses to open text questions illustrated a complex interplay of challenges contributing to mental ill health including: acute health anxieties; the mental load of managing multiple responsibilities; loss of social support and coping strategies; pressures of financial and employment insecurity; and being unable to switch off from the pandemic. CONCLUSIONS: Mental ill health has worsened for many during the COVID-19 lockdown, particularly in those who are lonely and economically insecure. The magnitude of associations between key exposures and worsening mental health varied between ethnic groups. Mental health problems may have longer term consequences for public health and interventions that address the potential causes are needed.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Mental Health , Anxiety/epidemiology , Child , Communicable Disease Control , Depression/epidemiology , Female , Housing Instability , Humans , Longitudinal Studies , Mothers , SARS-CoV-2 , United Kingdom
10.
Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act ; 18(1): 117, 2021 09 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1398866

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: In England, the onset of COVID-19 and a rapidly increasing infection rate resulted in a lockdown (March-June 2020) which placed strict restrictions on movement of the public, including children. Using data collected from children living in a multi-ethnic city with high levels of deprivation, this study aimed to: (1) report children's self-reported physical activity (PA) during the first COVID-19 UK lockdown and identify associated factors; (2) examine changes of children's self-reported PA prior to and during the first UK lockdown. METHODS: This study is part of the Born in Bradford (BiB) COVID-19 Research Study. PA (amended Youth Activity Profile), sleep, sedentary behaviours, daily frequency/time/destination/activity when leaving the home, were self-reported by 949 children (9-13 years). A sub-sample (n = 634) also self-reported PA (Physical Activity Questionnaire for Children) pre-pandemic (2017-February 2020). Univariate analysis assessed differences in PA between sex and ethnicity groups; multivariable logistic regression identified factors associated with children's PA. Differences in children's levels of being sufficiently active prior to and during the lockdown were examined using the McNemar test; and multivariable logistic regression was used to identify factors explaining change. RESULTS: During the pandemic, White British (WB) children were more sufficiently active (34.1%) compared to Pakistani Heritage children (PH) (22.8%) or 'Other' ethnicity children (O) (22.8%). WB children reported leaving the home more frequently and for longer periods than PH and O children. Modifiable variables related to being sufficiently active were frequency, duration, type of activity, and destination away from the home environment. There was a large reduction in children being sufficiently active during the first COVID-19 lockdown (28.9%) compared to pre-pandemic (69.4%). CONCLUSIONS: Promoting safe extended periods of PA everyday outdoors is important for all children, in particular for children from ethnic minority groups. Children's PA during the first COVID-19 UK lockdown has drastically reduced from before. Policy and decision makers, and practitioners should consider the findings in order to begin to understand the impact and consequences that COVID-19 has had upon children's PA which is a key and vital behaviour for health and development.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/prevention & control , Communicable Disease Control , Ethnicity , Exercise , Self Report , Adolescent , COVID-19/epidemiology , Child , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Housing , Humans , Longitudinal Studies , Male , Minority Groups , SARS-CoV-2 , United Kingdom/epidemiology
11.
Int J Environ Res Public Health ; 18(17)2021 08 29.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1374414

ABSTRACT

This study aims to understand the experience and impact of the initial COVID-19 lockdown in young families with children aged below 4 years. Free text questions were administered to participants in the ORIGINS (Australia) and Born in Bradford (UK) cohort studies to collect qualitative information on worries, concerns and enjoyable experiences during the pandemic. A total of 903 (400 for ORIGINS and 503 for BiB) participants completed the two surveys during April 2020. Despite varying in geography, levels of socio-economic disadvantage and their situational context during the pandemic, respondents from both cohorts reported similar worries and challenges during the lockdown period, including: employment/finances, health anxiety, mental health and social isolation, caring for children and child development. Families across the globe experienced both positive and negative immediate impacts of COVID-19. Population-based data can be used to inform the development of support services, public health campaigns and universal interventions to assist families in future health crises.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Child , Child, Preschool , Communicable Disease Control , Humans , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2 , United Kingdom
12.
PLoS One ; 16(5): e0251685, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1247647

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Black, Asian and minority ethnic communities suffer from disproportionately poorer health than the general population. This issue has been recently exemplified by the large numbers of infection rates and deaths caused by covid-19 in BAME populations. Future research has the potential to improve health outcomes for these groups. High quality research priority setting is crucial to effectively consider the needs of the most vulnerable groups of the population. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this systematic review is to identify existing research priority studies conducted for BAME health and to determine the extent to which they followed good practice principles for research priority setting. METHOD: Included studies were identified by searching Medline, Cinnahl, PsychINFO, Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection, as well as searches in grey literature. Search terms included "research priority setting", "research prioritisation", "research agenda", "Black and minority ethnic", "ethnic group". Studies were included if they identified or elicited research priorities for BAME health and if they outlined a process of conducting a research prioritisation exercise. A checklist of Nine Common Themes of Good Practice in research priority setting was used as a methodological framework to evaluate the research priority processes of each study. RESULTS: Out of 1514 citations initially obtained, 17 studies were included in the final synthesis. Topic areas for their research prioritisation exercise included suicide prevention, knee surgery, mental health, preterm birth, and child obesity. Public and patient involvement was included in eleven studies. Methods of research prioritisation included workshops, Delphi techniques, surveys, focus groups and interviews. The quality of empirical evidence was diverse. None of the exercises followed all good practice principles as outlined in the checklist. Areas that were lacking in particular were: the lack of a comprehensive approach to guide the process; limited use of criteria to guide discussion around priorities; unequal or no representation from ethnic minorities, and poor evaluation of their own processes. CONCLUSIONS: Research priority setting practices were found to mostly not follow good practice guidelines which aim to ensure rigour in priority setting activities and support the inclusion of BAME communities in establishing the research agenda. Research is unlikely to deliver useful findings that can support relevant research and positive change for BAME communities unless they fulfil areas of good practice such as inclusivity of key stakeholders' input, planning for implementation of identified priorities, criteria for deciding on priorities, and evaluation of their processes in research priority setting.


Subject(s)
Asian , Black or African American , COVID-19 , Health Services Research , Minority Groups , SARS-CoV-2 , Humans
13.
Health Expect ; 24(4): 1158-1167, 2021 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1214790

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 vaccines can offer a route out of the pandemic, yet initial research suggests that many are unwilling to be vaccinated. A rise in the spread of misinformation is thought to have played a significant role in vaccine hesitancy. To maximize uptake, it is important to understand why misinformation has been able to take hold at this time and why it may pose a more significant problem within certain contexts. OBJECTIVE: To understand people's COVID-19 beliefs, their interactions with (mis)information during COVID-19 and attitudes towards a COVID-19 vaccine. DESIGN AND PARTICIPANTS: Bradford, UK, was chosen as the study site to provide evidence to local decision makers. In-depth phone interviews were carried out with 20 people from different ethnic groups and areas of Bradford during Autumn 2020. Reflexive thematic analysis was conducted. RESULTS: Participants discussed a wide range of COVID-19 misinformation they had encountered, resulting in confusion, distress and mistrust. Vaccine hesitancy could be attributed to three prominent factors: safety concerns, negative stories and personal knowledge. The more confused, distressed and mistrusting participants felt about their social worlds during the pandemic, the less positive they were about a vaccine. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy needs to be understood in the context of the relationship between the spread of misinformation and associated emotional reactions. Vaccine programmes should provide a focused, localized and empathetic response to counter misinformation. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: A rapid community and stakeholder engagement process was undertaken to identify COVID-19 priority topics important to Bradford citizens and decision makers.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Vaccines , COVID-19 Vaccines , Communication , Humans , SARS-CoV-2 , United Kingdom
14.
Wellcome Open Res ; 5: 228, 2020.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1134488

ABSTRACT

Background: Lockdown measures implemented to contain the Covid-19 virus may be increasing health inequalities, with families from deprived and ethnically diverse backgrounds most likely to be adversely affected. This paper presents findings of the experiences of the Covid-19 lockdown on families living in the multi-ethnic and deprived city of Bradford, England. Methods: Questionnaire surveys were sent during the Covid-19 UK lockdown (10th April to 30 th June 2020) to parents in two prospective birth cohort studies. Cross tabulations explored variation by ethnicity and employment status. Text from open questions were analysed using thematic analysis. Results: Of 7,652 families invited, 2,144 (28%) participated. Ethnicity of respondents was: 957 (47%) Pakistani heritage, 715 (35%) White British and 356 (18%) other. 971 (46%) live in the most deprived decile of material deprivation in England. 2,043 (95%) were mothers and 101 were partners. The results summarised below are based on the mothers' responses. Many families live in poor quality (N=574, 28%), and overcrowded (N=364, 19%) housing; this was more common in families of Pakistani heritage and other ethnicities. Financial (N=738 (37%), food (N=396, 20%), employment (N=728, 37%) and housing (N=204, 10%) insecurities were common, particularly in those who were furloughed, self-employed not working or unemployed. Clinically significant depression and anxiety symptoms were reported by 372 (19%) and 318 (16%) of the mothers and were more common in White British mothers and those with economic insecurity. Open text responses corroborated these findings and highlighted high levels of anxiety about becoming ill or dying from Covid-19. Conclusions: The experiences of the Covid-19 lockdown in this ethnically diverse and deprived population highlight a large number of families living in poor housing conditions, suffering from economic insecurity and poor mental health. There is a need for policy makers and commissioners to better support these families.

15.
Wellcome Open Res ; 5: 191, 2020.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-828561

ABSTRACT

The UK COVID-19 lockdown has included restricting social movement and interaction to slow the spread of disease and reduce demand on NHS acute services. It is likely that the impacts of restrictions will hit the least advantaged disproportionately and will worsen existing structural inequalities amongst deprived and ethnic minority groups. The aim of this study is to deliver rapid intelligence to enable an effective COVID-19 response, including co-production of interventions, that address key issues in the City of Bradford, UK, and nationally. In the longer term we aim to understand the impacts of the response on health trajectories and inequalities in these. In this paper we describe our approach and protocol. We plan an adaptive longitudinal mixed methods approach embedded with Born in Bradford (BiB) birth cohorts which have rich existing data (including questionnaire, routine health and biobank). All work packages (WP) interact and are ongoing. WP1 uses co-production and engagement methods with communities, decision-makers and researchers to continuously set (changing) research priorities and will, longer-term, co-produce interventions to aid the City's recovery. In WP2 repeated quantitative surveys will be administered during lockdown (April-June 2020), with three repeat surveys until 12 months post-lockdown with an ethnically diverse pool of BiB participants (parents, children aged 9-13 years, pregnant women: total sample pool N=7,652, N=5,154, N=1,800). A range of health, social, economic and education outcomes will be assessed. In WP3 priority topics identified in WP1 and WP2 will be explored qualitatively. Initial priority topics include children's mental wellbeing, health beliefs and the peri/post-natal period. Feedback loops will ensure findings are fed directly to decision-makers and communities (via WP1) to enable co-production of acceptable interventions and identify future priority topic areas. Findings will be used to aid development of local and national policy to support recovery from the pandemic and minimise health inequalities.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL