Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 18 de 18
Filter
1.
Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol ; 2021 Dec 16.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1579049

ABSTRACT

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.

2.
Preprint in English | EuropePMC | ID: ppcovidwho-295439

ABSTRACT

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 unprecedent 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.

3.
PLoS One ; 16(11): e0258871, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1502069

ABSTRACT

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.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines , COVID-19/prevention & control , Patient Acceptance of Health Care , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , COVID-19/psychology , Female , Humans , Ireland , Longitudinal Studies , Male , Middle Aged , Politics , Socioeconomic Factors , Time Factors , United Kingdom , Young Adult
4.
Int J Methods Psychiatr Res ; : e1899, 2021 Nov 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1499301

ABSTRACT

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.

6.
Sci Rep ; 11(1): 19237, 2021 09 28.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1442807

ABSTRACT

The COVID-19 pandemic has brought about unprecedented global changes in individual and collective behaviour. To reduce the spread of the virus, public health bodies have promoted social distancing measures while attempting to mitigate their mental health consequences. The current study aimed to identify cognitive predictors of social distancing adherence and mental health symptoms, using computational models derived from delay discounting (the preference for smaller, immediate rewards over larger, delayed rewards) and patch foraging (the ability to trade-off between exploiting a known resource and exploring an unknown one). In a representative sample of the UK population (N = 442), we find that steeper delay discounting predicted poorer adherence to social distancing measures and greater sensitivity to reward magnitude during delay discounting predicted higher levels of anxiety symptoms. Furthermore, under-valuing recently sampled information during foraging independently predicted greater violation of lockdown guidance. Our results suggest that those who show greater discounting of delayed rewards struggle to maintain social distancing. Further, those who adapt faster to new information are better equipped to change their behaviour in response to public health measures. These findings can inform interventions that seek to increase compliance with social distancing measures whilst minimising negative repercussions for mental health.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/psychology , Guideline Adherence , Physical Distancing , Anxiety/epidemiology , Communicable Disease Control , Delay Discounting , Female , Humans , Male , Mental Health , Motivation , Pandemics , Public Health , United Kingdom
8.
Acta Psychol (Amst) ; 220: 103416, 2021 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1401129

ABSTRACT

The COVID-19 Psychological Research Consortium (C19PRC) study was established to determine the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the population of multiple countries. Here, we provide a methodological overview, cohort profile, data access, and summary of key findings from the Republic of Ireland arm of the C19PRC study. A longitudinal internet panel survey was designed to collect data from a nationally representative sample of Irish adults (N = 1041) who were tracked from March/April 2020 to March/April 2021. Quota sampling methods were used to produce a sample that was representative of the population with respect to sex, age, and regional distribution. Data were collected in five waves, and new participants were recruited at follow-up waves to cover sample attrition and produce nationally representative samples at various points during the first year of the pandemic. A comprehensive battery of measures was used throughout the project to assess an array of sociodemographic, political, social, psychological, physical health, COVID-19, and mental health variables. Analyses were conducted to compare sample characteristic to known population parameters from available census data. These analyses showed that the sample was representative of the general adult population of Ireland on the three quota variables and was reasonable representative of the population across a diverse range of sociodemographic variables. These data representative the first and only nationally representative, longitudinal survey of the mental health of the Irish population. These data are made freely available to interested users (https://osf.io/2huzd/files/) and the findings of this study provide a methodological basis for the future use of these data.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pandemics , Adult , Humans , Ireland/epidemiology , Longitudinal Studies , SARS-CoV-2
9.
J Affect Disord ; 295: 1024-1031, 2021 12 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1385797

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Longitudinal data indicates that the mental health of the general population may not have been as badly affected by the COVID-19 pandemic as some had feared. Most studies examining change in mental health during the pandemic have assumed population homogeneity which may conceal evidence of worsening mental health for some. In this study, we applied a heterogeneous perspective to determine if there were distinct groups in the population characterised by different patterns of change in internalizing symptoms during the pandemic. METHODS: Self-report data were collected from a nationally representative sample of Irish adults (N = 1041) at four time-points between April and December 2020. RESULTS: In the entire sample, mean levels of internalizing symptoms significantly declined from March to December 2020. However, we identified four distinct groups with different patterns of change. The most common response was 'Resilience' (66.7%), followed by 'Improving' (17.9%), 'Worsening' (11.3%), and 'Sustained' (4.1%). Belonging to the 'Worsening' class was associated with younger age, city dwelling, current and past treatment for a mental health problem, higher levels of empathy, and higher levels of loneliness. LIMITATIONS: Sample attrition was relatively high and although this was managed using robust statistical methods, bias associated with non-responses cannot be entirely ruled out. CONCLUSION: The majority of adults experienced no change, or an improvement in internalizing symptoms during the pandemic, and a relatively small proportion of adults experienced a worsening of internalizing symptoms. Limited public mental health resources should be targeted toward helping these at-risk individuals.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pandemics , Adult , Depression , Humans , SARS-CoV-2 , Self Report
10.
PLoS One ; 16(8): e0256041, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1362088

ABSTRACT

Despite the severe psychological impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, some individuals do not develop high levels of psychological distress and can be termed resilient. Using the ecological resilience model, we examined factors promoting or hindering resilience in the COVID-19 pandemic. Of the 1034 participants (49.9±16.2 years; females 51.2%) from Italian general population, 70% displayed resilient outcomes and 30% reported moderate-severe anxiety and/or depression. A binary regression model revealed that factors promoting resilience were mostly psychological (e.g., trait resilience, conscientiousness) together with social distancing. Conversely, factors hindering resilience included COVID-19-anxiety, COVID-19-related PTSD symptoms, intolerance of uncertainty, loneliness, living with children, higher education, and living in regions where the virus was starting to spread. In conclusion, the ecological resilience model in the COVID-19 pandemic explained 64% of the variance and identified factors promoting or hindering resilient outcomes. Critically, these findings can inform psychological interventions supporting individuals by strengthening factors associated with resilience.


Subject(s)
Anxiety/epidemiology , COVID-19/psychology , Depression/epidemiology , Resilience, Psychological , Adult , Aged , Anxiety/etiology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Depression/etiology , Female , Humans , Italy , Male , Middle Aged , Models, Psychological , Physical Distancing , Risk Factors
11.
Suicide Life Threat Behav ; 2021 Jun 29.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1286704

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Little is known about the lifetime prevalence of different indicators of suicidality in the Irish general population; whether suicidality has increased during the COVID-19 pandemic; and what factors associated with belonging to different points on a continuum of suicidality risk. METHODS: A nationally representative sample of Irish adults (N = 1,032) completed self-report measures in May 2020 and a follow-up in August 2020 (n = 715). RESULTS: Lifetime prevalence rates were 29.5% for suicidal ideation, 12.9% for non-suicidal self-injury (NSSI), and 11.2% for attempted suicide. There were no changes in past two-week rates of NSSI and attempted suicide during the pandemic. Correlations between the indicators of suicidality supported a progression from ideation to NSSI to attempted suicide. Suicidal ideation alone was associated with being male, unemployed, higher loneliness, and lower religiosity. NSSI (with no co-occurring attempted suicide) was associated with a history of mental health treatment. Attempted suicide was associated with ethnic minority status, lower education, lower income, PTSD, depression, and history of mental health treatment. CONCLUSION: Suicidal ideation, NSSI, and attempted suicide are relatively common phenomena in the general adult Irish population, and each has unique psychosocial correlates. These findings highlight important targets for prevention and intervention efforts.

12.
Int J Methods Psychiatr Res ; 30(3): e1880, 2021 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1237438

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: The COVID-19 Psychological Research Consortium (C19PRC) Study aims to assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic in the adult population in multiple countries. This paper describes the third wave of the UK survey (the 'parent' strand of the Consortium) during July-August 2020. METHODS: Adults (N = 2025) who participated in the baseline and/or first follow-up surveys were reinvited to participate in this survey, which assessed: (1) COVID-19 related knowledge, attitudes, and behaviours; (2) the occurrence of common mental disorders; as well as the role of (3) psychological factors and (4) social and political attitudes, in influencing the public's response to the pandemic. Weights were calculated using a survey raking algorithm to ensure that the cross-sectional sample is nationally representative in terms of gender, age, and household income, and representative of the baseline sample characteristics for household composition, ethnicity, urbanicity and born/raised in UK. RESULTS: 1166 adults (57.6% of baseline participants) provided full interviews at Wave 3. The raking procedure successfully re-balanced the cross-sectional sample to within 1% of population estimates across selected socio-demographic characteristics. CONCLUSION: This paper demonstrates the strength of the C19PRC Study data to facilitate and stimulate interdisciplinary research addressing important public health questions relating to the COVID-19 pandemic.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/psychology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice , Humans , Longitudinal Studies , Male , Middle Aged , Surveys and Questionnaires , United Kingdom , Young Adult
13.
Psychol Med ; : 1-9, 2021 Apr 20.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1217657

ABSTRACT

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.

14.
Br J Health Psychol ; 2021 May 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1216737

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: Vaccine hesitancy is a growing concern and threat to public health. This research will begin to examine the relative influence of relevant psychological, social, and situational factors on intent to engage with a hypothetical COVID-19 vaccine among key workers and non-key workers. DESIGN: Cross-sectional. METHODS: The study utilized a sample of UK adults who completed the 1-month follow-up of The COVID-19 Psychological Wellbeing Study during April/May 2020 and indicated having not been previously diagnosed with COVID-19 (key workers n = 584; not key workers n = 1,021). These groups were compared in relation to their intentions to vaccinate, perceived risk of infection, and symptom severity. Binary logistic regression was used to examine predictors of vaccine hesitancy. RESULTS: Overall, 74.2% of the sample (76.2% key workers, 73.1% non-key workers) indicated they would accept a COVID-19 vaccine in future. Key workers (in particular health and social care workers) had a higher perceived risk of becoming infected in the coming months. For key workers, being female and perceiving oneself as having relatively low infection risk in the next 6 months was associated with increased likelihood of vaccine hesitancy. For non-key workers, however, being aged 25-54, having a low or average income and not knowing someone diagnosed with COVID-19 were associated with hesitancy. CONCLUSIONS: The proportion of individuals willing to accept a vaccine is encouraging but there is much room for improvement. Given the unique predictors of vaccine hesitancy in each group, public health campaigns may benefit from targeted messaging.

15.
Psychol Med ; : 1-9, 2021 Mar 16.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1147816

ABSTRACT

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.

16.
PLoS One ; 16(1): e0246339, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1050495

ABSTRACT

The over-purchasing and hoarding of necessities is a common response to crises, especially in developed economies where there is normally an expectation of plentiful supply. This behaviour was observed internationally during the early stages of the Covid-19 pandemic. In the absence of actual scarcity, this behaviour can be described as 'panic buying' and can lead to temporary shortages. However, there have been few psychological studies of this phenomenon. Here we propose a psychological model of over-purchasing informed by animal foraging theory and make predictions about variables that predict over-purchasing by either exacerbating or mitigating the anticipation of future scarcity. These variables include additional scarcity cues (e.g. loss of income), distress (e.g. depression), psychological factors that draw attention to these cues (e.g. neuroticism) or to reassuring messages (eg. analytical reasoning) or which facilitate over-purchasing (e.g. income). We tested our model in parallel nationally representative internet surveys of the adult general population conducted in the United Kingdom (UK: N = 2025) and the Republic of Ireland (RoI: N = 1041) 52 and 31 days after the first confirmed cases of COVID-19 were detected in the UK and RoI, respectively. About three quarters of participants reported minimal over-purchasing. There was more over-purchasing in RoI vs UK and in urban vs rural areas. When over-purchasing occurred, in both countries it was observed across a wide range of product categories and was accounted for by a single latent factor. It was positively predicted by household income, the presence of children at home, psychological distress (depression, death anxiety), threat sensitivity (right wing authoritarianism) and mistrust of others (paranoia). Analytic reasoning ability had an inhibitory effect. Predictor variables accounted for 36% and 34% of the variance in over-purchasing in the UK and RoI respectively. With some caveats, the data supported our model and points to strategies to mitigate over-purchasing in future crises.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/psychology , Consumer Behavior/economics , Pandemics/economics , Panic/physiology , Adult , Aged , Anxiety/psychology , COVID-19/economics , Depression/psychology , Female , Hoarding/psychology , Humans , Ireland , Male , Middle Aged , Models, Psychological , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Stress, Psychological/epidemiology , Stress, Psychological/psychology , Surveys and Questionnaires , United Kingdom
18.
J Psychopathol Behav Assess ; : 1-17, 2020 Nov 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-917128

ABSTRACT

The COVID-19 Psychological Wellbeing Study was designed and implemented as a rapid survey of the psychosocial impacts of the novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), known as COVID-19 in residents across the United Kingdom. This study utilised a longitudinal design to collect online survey based data. The aim of this paper was to describe (1) the rationale behind the study and the corresponding selection of constructs to be assessed; (2) the study design and methodology; (3) the resultant sociodemographic characteristics of the full sample; (4) how the baseline survey data compares to the UK adult population (using data from the Census) on a variety of sociodemographic variables; (5) the ongoing efforts for weekly and monthly longitudinal assessments of the baseline cohort; and (6) outline future research directions. We believe the study is in a unique position to make a significant contribution to the growing body of literature to help understand the psychological impact of this pandemic and inform future clinical and research directions that the UK will implement in response to COVID-19.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...