Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 20
Filter
1.
EuropePMC; 2022.
Preprint in English | EuropePMC | ID: ppcovidwho-333008

ABSTRACT

Importance Predictive models can help identify SARS-CoV-2 patients at greatest risk of post-COVID sequelae and direct them towards appropriate care. Objective To develop and internally validate a model to predict children and young people most likely to experience at least one impairing physical symptom 3 months after a SARS-CoV-2 PCR-test and to determine whether the impact of these predictors differed by SARS-CoV-2 infection status. Design Potential pre-specified predictors included: SARS-CoV-2 status, sex, age, ethnicity, deprivation, quality of life/functioning (5 EQ-5D-Y items), physical and mental health, and loneliness (all prior to SARS-CoV-2 testing), and number of physical symptoms at testing. Logistic regression was used to develop the model. Model performance was assessed using calibration and discrimination measures;internal validation was performed via bootstrapping;the final model was adjusted for overfitting. Setting National cohort study of SARS-CoV-2 PCR-positive and PCR-negative participants matched according to age, sex, and geographical area. Participants Children and young people aged 11-17 years who were tested for SARS-CoV-2 infection in England, January to March 2021. Main outcome measure one or more physical symptom 3 months after initial PCR-testing which affected physical, mental or social well-being and interfered with daily living. Results A total of 50,836 children and young people were approached;7,096 (3,227 test-positives, 3,869 test-negatives) who completed a questionnaire 3 months after their PCR-test were included. 39.6% (1,279/3,227) of SAR-CoV-2 PCR-positives and 30.6% (1,184/3,869) of SAR-CoV-2 PCR-negatives had at least one impairing physical symptom 3 months post-test. The final model contained predictors: SARS-COV-2 status, number of symptoms at testing, sex, age, ethnicity, self-rated physical and mental health, feelings of loneliness and four EQ-5D-Y items before testing. Internal validation showed minimal overfitting with excellent calibration and discrimination measures (optimism adjusted calibration slope:0.97527;C-statistic:0.83640). Conclusions and relevance We developed a risk prediction equation to identify those most at risk of experiencing at least one impairing physical symptom 3 months after a SARS-CoV-2 PCR-test which could serve as a useful triage and management tool for children and young people during the ongoing pandemic. External validation is required before large-scale implementation. Key Points Question Which children have impairing physical symptoms during the COVID-19 pandemic? Findings Using data from a large national matched cohort study in children and young people (CYP) aged 11-17 years (N=7,096), we developed a prediction model for experiencing at least one impairing physical symptom 3 months after testing for SARS-COV-2. Our model had excellent predictive ability, calibration and discrimination;we used it to produce a risk estimation calculator. Meaning Our developed risk calculator could serve as a useful tool in the early identification and management of CYP at risk of persisting physical symptoms in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic.

2.
Br J Psychiatry ; : 1-3, 2022 Feb 17.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1690846

ABSTRACT

There are many structural problems facing the UK at present, from a weakened National Health Service to deeply ingrained inequality. These challenges extend through society to clinical practice and have an impact on current mental health research, which was in a perilous state even before the coronavirus pandemic hit. In this editorial, a group of psychiatric researchers who currently sit on the Academic Faculty of the Royal College of Psychiatrists and represent the breadth of research in mental health from across the UK discuss the challenges faced in academic mental health research. They reflect on the need for additional investment in the specialty and ask whether this is a turning point for the future of mental health research.

3.
EuropePMC; 2021.
Preprint in English | EuropePMC | ID: ppcovidwho-322075

ABSTRACT

Introduction: We describe post-COVID symptomatology in a national sample of 11-17-year-old children and young people (CYP) with PCR-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection compared to test-negative controls. Methods: and analysis: A cohort study of test-positive (n=3,065) and age-, sex- and geographically-matched test-negative CYP (n=3,739) completed detailed questionnaires 3 months post-test. Results: At PCR-testing, 35.4% of test-positives and 8.3% of test-negatives had any symptoms whilst 30.6% and 6.2%, respectively, had 3+ symptoms. At 3 months post-testing, 66.5% of test-positives and 53.3% of test-negatives had any symptoms, whilst 30.3% and 16.2%, respectively, had 3+ symptoms. Latent class analysis identified two classes, characterised by “few” or “multiple” symptoms. This latter class was more frequent among test-positives, females, older CYP and those with worse pre-test physical and mental health. Discussion: Test-positive CYP had a similar symptom profile to test-negative CYP but with higher prevalence of single and, particularly, multiple symptoms at PCR-testing and 3 months later.

4.
EuropePMC; 2021.
Preprint in English | EuropePMC | ID: ppcovidwho-319097

ABSTRACT

Background: The UK population’s mental health declined at the pandemic onset. Convenience sample surveys indicate recovery began soon after. Using a probability sample, we tracked average mental health during the pandemic, characterised distinct mental health trajectories and identified predictors of deterioration.Methods: Secondary analysis of five waves of UK Household Longitudinal Survey from late April-early October 2020 and pre-pandemic data, 2018-2019. Mental health was assessed in 19,763 adults (≥16 years) using 12-item General Health Questionnaire. Latent class growth models identified discrete mental health trajectories and fixed-effects regression identified predictors of change in mental health.Findings: Average population mental health deteriorated with onset of the pandemic and did not begin improving until July 2020. Latent class analysis identified six distinct mental health trajectories up to October 2020. Three-quarters had consistently good (46·2%) or very good (30·9%) mental health. Two ‘recovery’ groups (15·8%) initially experienced marked declines in mental health, improving to their pre-pandemic levels by October. For 4·8%, mental health steadily deteriorated and for 2·3% it was very poor throughout. These two groups were more likely to have pre-existing mental or physical ill-health, live in deprived neighbourhoods and be non-white. Infection with COVID-19, local lockdown and financial difficulties all predicted subsequent mental health deterioration.Interpretation: Between April-October 2020, the mental health of most UK adults remained resilient or returned to pre-pandemic levels. One-in-fourteen experienced deteriorating or consistently poor mental health. People living in areas affected by lockdown, struggling financially, with pre-existing conditions or COVID infection might benefit most from early intervention.Funding Statement: None.Declaration of Interests: None.Ethics Approval Statement: Ethics approval was granted by the University of Essex Ethics Committee for the COVID-19 web and telephone surveys (ETH1920-1271).

5.
Lancet Child Adolesc Health ; 6(4): 230-239, 2022 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1671374

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: We describe post-COVID symptomatology in a non-hospitalised, national sample of adolescents aged 11-17 years with PCR-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection compared with matched adolescents with negative PCR status. METHODS: In this national cohort study, adolescents aged 11-17 years from the Public Health England database who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 between January and March, 2021, were matched by month of test, age, sex, and geographical region to adolescents who tested negative. 3 months after testing, a subsample of adolescents were contacted to complete a detailed questionnaire, which collected data on demographics and their physical and mental health at the time of PCR testing (retrospectively) and at the time of completing the questionnaire (prospectively). We compared symptoms between the test-postive and test-negative groups, and used latent class analysis to assess whether and how physical symptoms at baseline and at 3 months clustered among participants. This study is registered with the ISRCTN registry (ISRCTN 34804192). FINDINGS: 23 048 adolescents who tested positive and 27 798 adolescents who tested negative between Jan 1, 2021, and March 31, 2021, were contacted, and 6804 adolescents (3065 who tested positive and 3739 who tested negative) completed the questionnaire (response rate 13·4%). At PCR testing, 1084 (35·4%) who tested positive and 309 (8·3%) who tested negative were symptomatic and 936 (30·5%) from the test-positive group and 231 (6·2%) from the test-negative group had three or more symptoms. 3 months after testing, 2038 (66·5%) who tested positive and 1993 (53·3%) who tested negative had any symptoms, and 928 (30·3%) from the test-positive group and 603 (16·2%) from the test-negative group had three or more symptoms. At 3 months after testing, the most common symptoms among the test-positive group were tiredness (1196 [39·0%]), headache (710 [23·2%]), and shortness of breath (717 [23·4%]), and among the test-negative group were tiredness (911 [24·4%]), headache (530 [14·2%]), and other (unspecified; 590 [15·8%]). Latent class analysis identified two classes, characterised by few or multiple symptoms. The estimated probability of being in the multiple symptom class was 29·6% (95% CI 27·4-31·7) for the test-positive group and 19·3% (17·7-21·0) for the test-negative group (risk ratio 1·53; 95% CI 1·35-1·70). The multiple symptoms class was more frequent among those with positive PCR results than negative results, in girls than boys, in adolescents aged 15-17 years than those aged 11-14 years, and in those with lower pretest physical and mental health. INTERPRETATION: Adolescents who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 had similar symptoms to those who tested negative, but had a higher prevalence of single and, particularly, multiple symptoms at the time of PCR testing and 3 months later. Clinicians should consider multiple symptoms that affect functioning and recognise different clusters of symptoms. The multiple and varied symptoms show that a multicomponent intervention will be required, and that mental and physical health symptoms occur concurrently, reflecting their close relationship. FUNDING: UK Department of Health and Social Care, in their capacity as the National Institute for Health Research, and UK Research and Innovation.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/epidemiology , Adolescent , COVID-19/pathology , COVID-19/psychology , COVID-19 Testing , Child , Cohort Studies , England/epidemiology , Female , Humans , Male , Polymerase Chain Reaction , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Surveys and Questionnaires
6.
EuropePMC; 2020.
Preprint in English | EuropePMC | ID: ppcovidwho-293948

ABSTRACT

Background: There is growing global concern about the potential impact of the Covid-19 pandemic on population mental health. We examine changes in adult mental health in the UK population before and during the lockdown. <br><br>Methods: Secondary analysis of the UK Household Longitudinal Study Waves 6 (2014/15) to 9 (2018/19), matched to the Covid-19 web-survey completed by 17,452 panel members 23-29 April 2020. Mental health was assessed using the 12-item General Health Questionnaire (GHQ). Repeated cross-sectional analyses were conducted to examine annual temporal trends. Fixed effects regression models were fitted to identify within-person change compared to preceding trends. <br><br>Findings: Mean population GHQ-12 score increased from 11·5 (95% confidence interval: 11·3–11·6) in 2018/19 to 12·6 (12·5–12·8) in April 2020, one month into lockdown. This was 0·48 (0·07-0·90) points higher than expected when accounting for prior upward trends between 2013 and 2019. Comparing scores within-individuals, adjusting for time-trends and predictors, increases were greatest in 18-24-year-olds (2·7, 1·89-3·48), 25-34-year-olds (1·6, 0·96-2·18), women (0·9, 0·50-1·35), and people living with young children (1·45, 0·79-2·12). People employed before the pandemic averaged a notable increase (0·6;0·20-1·06). <br><br>Interpretation: In late April 2020, mental health in the UK deteriorated compared to trends pre-Covid, particularly in young people, women and those living with young children. Those in employment before the pandemic also experienced greater deterioration one month into lockdown, perhaps due to actual or anticipated redundancy. While deterioration occurred across income groups, we anticipate inequalities may widen over time, as in other causes of recessions.<br><br>Funding Statement: This study was unfunded.<br><br>Declaration of Interests: The authors declare no competing interests. <br><br>Ethics Approval Statement: The data used are publicly available via UK Data Service repository (study numbers 6614 and 8644), and do not require ethical assessment for academic research purposes.

7.
EuropePMC; 2021.
Preprint in English | EuropePMC | ID: ppcovidwho-293515

ABSTRACT

Background Social isolation is strongly associated with poor mental health. The COVID-19 pandemic and ensuing social restrictions disrupted young people’s social interactions and resulted in several periods during which school closures necessitated online learning. We hypothesise that digitally excluded young people would demonstrate greater deterioration in their mental health than their digitally connected peers during this time. Methods We analysed representative mental health data from a sample of UK 10–15-year-olds ( N = 1387);Understanding Society collected the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire in 2017-19 and thrice during the pandemic (July 2020, November 2020 and March 2021). We employed cross-sectional methods and longitudinal latent growth curve modelling to describe trajectories of adolescent mental health for participants with and without access to a computer or a good internet connection for schoolwork. Outcomes Adolescent mental health had a quadratic trajectory during the COVID-19 pandemic, with the highest mean Total Difficulties score around December 2020. The worsening and recovery of mental health during the pandemic was greatly pronounced among those without access to a computer, although we did not find evidence for a similar effect among those without a good internet connection. Interpretation Digital exclusion, as indicated by lack of access to a computer, is a tractable risk factor that likely compounds other adversities facing children and young people during periods of social isolation. Funding British Psychological Society;School of the Biological Sciences, University of Cambridge;NIHR Applied Research Centre;Medical Research Council;Economic and Social Research Council;and Emmanuel College, University of Cambridge.

9.
The Lancet Psychiatry ; 8(5):353-354, 2021.
Article in English | APA PsycInfo | ID: covidwho-1340921

ABSTRACT

This article considers the clinical and policy implications of initial results of the follow-up of England's Mental Health of Children and Young People (MHCYP) survey. This survey provides a resource on what the COVID-19 pandemic has meant for children. The study showed that the increase in probable mental health problems reported in adults also affected 5-16 year olds in England, with the incidence rising from 10.8% in 2017 to 16.0% in July 2020 across age, gender, and ethnic groups. The results highlight how social protection systems must respond to the socioeconomic challenges facing families. Findings reveal disrupted access to health care: 44.6% of 17-22 year olds with probable mental health problems reported not seeking help because of the pandemic. Clinicians have raised similar concerns about timely access to services, and a sharp decrease in Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services referrals has been observed.5 Children and young people have been physically distanced from adults outside their family who might monitor their wellbeing and intervene: 21.6% of children and 29.0% of young people with probable mental health problems reported having no adult at school or work to whom they could turn during lockdown. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved)

10.
Child Adolesc Ment Health ; 26(3): 272-273, 2021 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1269724

ABSTRACT

Following COVID-19, there has been increasing concern about the well-being of children and young people across the United Kingdom; however, our major problem is the lack of robust data. We discuss emerging research capturing the impact of restrictions and experiences of COVID-19 on children and young people. We suggest further and more detailed analysis is urgently required to inform an evidence-based response. We conclude that although most of the UK's kids are probably OK, it is essential that those who are in need of support receive timely and informed intervention.


Subject(s)
Mental Disorders/epidemiology , Mental Health , Neurodevelopmental Disorders/epidemiology , Psychology, Adolescent , Adolescent , Child , Child, Preschool , Family , Family Conflict , Female , Food Supply , Humans , Male , Schools , United Kingdom
11.
Lancet Psychiatry ; 8(7): 610-619, 2021 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1219821

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The mental health of the UK population declined at the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. Convenience sample surveys indicate that recovery began soon after. Using a probability sample, we tracked mental health during the pandemic to characterise mental health trajectories and identify predictors of deterioration. METHODS: This study was a secondary analysis of five waves of the UK Household Longitudinal Study (a large, national, probability-based survey that has been collecting data continuously since January, 2009) from late April to early October, 2020 and pre-pandemic data taken from 2018-19. Mental health was assessed using the 12-item General Health Questionnaire (GHQ-12). We used latent class mixed models to identify discrete mental health trajectories and fixed-effects regression to identify predictors of change in mental health. FINDINGS: Mental health was assessed in 19 763 adults (≥16 years; 11 477 [58·1%] women and 8287 [41·9%] men; 3453 [17·5%] participants from minority ethnic groups). Mean population mental health deteriorated with the onset of the pandemic and did not begin improving until July, 2020. Latent class analysis identified five distinct mental health trajectories up to October 2020. Most individuals in the population had either consistently good (7437 [39·3%] participants) or consistently very good (7623 [37·5%] participants) mental health across the first 6 months of the pandemic. A recovering group (1727 [12·0%] participants) showed worsened mental health during the initial shock of the pandemic and then returned to around pre-pandemic levels of mental health by October, 2020. The two remaining groups were characterised by poor mental health throughout the observation period; for one group, (523 [4·1%] participants) there was an initial worsening in mental health that was sustained with highly elevated scores. The other group (1011 [7·0%] participants) had little initial acute deterioration in their mental health, but reported a steady and sustained decline in mental health over time. These last two groups were more likely to have pre-existing mental or physical ill-health, to live in deprived neighbourhoods, and be of Asian, Black or mixed ethnicity. Infection with SARS-CoV-2, local lockdown, and financial difficulties all predicted a subsequent deterioration in mental health. INTERPRETATION: Between April and October 2020, the mental health of most UK adults remained resilient or returned to pre-pandemic levels. Around one in nine individuals had deteriorating or consistently poor mental health. People living in areas affected by lockdown, struggling financially, with pre-existing conditions, or infection with SARS-CoV-2 might benefit most from early intervention. FUNDING: None.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/complications , Mental Disorders/epidemiology , Mental Health/statistics & numerical data , Models, Statistical , Adolescent , Adult , Female , Humans , Longitudinal Studies , Male , Middle Aged , Surveys and Questionnaires , United Kingdom/epidemiology , Young Adult
12.
Trials ; 22(1): 254, 2021 Apr 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1172844

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: MYRIAD (My Resilience in Adolescence) is a superiority, parallel group, cluster randomised controlled trial designed to examine the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a mindfulness training (MT) programme, compared with normal social and emotional learning (SEL) school provision to enhance mental health, social-emotional-behavioural functioning and well-being in adolescence. The original trial protocol was published in Trials (accessible at https://doi.org/10.1186/s13063-017-1917-4 ). This included recruitment in two cohorts, enabling the learning from the smaller first cohort to be incorporated in the second cohort. Here we describe final amendments to the study protocol and discuss their underlying rationale. METHODS: Four major changes were introduced into the study protocol: (1) there were changes in eligibility criteria, including a clearer operational definition to assess the degree of SEL implementation in schools, and also new criteria to avoid experimental contamination; (2) the number of schools and pupils that had to be recruited was increased based on what we learned in the first cohort; (3) some changes were made to the secondary outcome measures to improve their validity and ability to measure constructs of interest and to reduce the burden on school staff; and (4) the current Coronavirus Disease 2019 (SARS-CoV-2 or COVID-19) pandemic both influences and makes it difficult to interpret the 2-year follow-up primary endpoint results, so we changed our primary endpoint to 1-year follow-up. DISCUSSION: These changes to the study protocol were approved by the Trial Management Group, Trial Steering Committee and Data and Ethics Monitoring Committees and improved the enrolment of participants and quality of measures. Furthermore, the change in the primary endpoint will give a more reliable answer to our primary question because it was collected prior to the COVID-19 pandemic in both cohort 1 and cohort 2. Nevertheless, the longer 2-year follow-up data will still be acquired, although this time-point will be now framed as a second major investigation to answer some new important questions presented by the combination of the pandemic and our study design. TRIAL REGISTRATION: International Standard Randomised Controlled Trials ISRCTN86619085 . Registered on 3 June 2016.


Subject(s)
Cost-Benefit Analysis , Mindfulness/education , Schools , Adolescent , COVID-19 , Humans , Mental Health , Mindfulness/economics , Pandemics , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Treatment Outcome
13.
Front Psychiatry ; 12: 620842, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1133985

ABSTRACT

Objectives: Face-to-face healthcare, including psychiatric provision, must continue despite reduced interpersonal contact during the COVID-19 (SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus) pandemic. Community-based services might use domiciliary visits, consultations in healthcare settings, or remote consultations. Services might also alter direct contact between clinicians. We examined the effects of appointment types and clinician-clinician encounters upon infection rates. Design: Computer simulation. Methods: We modelled a COVID-19-like disease in a hypothetical community healthcare team, their patients, and patients' household contacts (family). In one condition, clinicians met patients and briefly met family (e.g., home visit or collateral history). In another, patients attended alone (e.g., clinic visit), segregated from each other. In another, face-to-face contact was eliminated (e.g., videoconferencing). We also varied clinician-clinician contact; baseline and ongoing "external" infection rates; whether overt symptoms reduced transmission risk behaviourally (e.g., via personal protective equipment, PPE); and household clustering. Results: Service organisation had minimal effects on whole-population infection under our assumptions but materially affected clinician infection. Appointment type and inter-clinician contact had greater effects at low external infection rates and without a behavioural symptom response. Clustering magnified the effect of appointment type. We discuss infection control and other factors affecting appointment choice and team organisation. Conclusions: Distancing between clinicians can have significant effects on team infection. Loss of clinicians to infection likely has an adverse impact on care, not modelled here. Appointments must account for clinical necessity as well as infection control. Interventions to reduce transmission risk can synergize, arguing for maximal distancing and behavioural measures (e.g., PPE) consistent with safe care.

15.
BJPsych Open ; 7(1): e34, 2021 Jan 13.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1027203

ABSTRACT

The Covid-19 crisis necessitated rapid adoption of remote consultations across National Health Service (NHS) child and adolescent mental health services (CAMHS). This study aimed to understand practitioners' experiences of rapid implementation of remote consultations across CAMHS in one NHS trust in the east of England. Data were collected through a brief questionnaire documenting clinicians' experiences following remote delivery of services. The questionnaire began before 'lockdown' and focused on assessment consultations (n = 102) as part of a planned move to virtual assessment. As the roll-out of remote consultations was extended at lockdown, we extended the questionnaire to include all remote clinical contacts (n = 202). Despite high levels of initial concern, clinicians' reports were positive overall; importantly, however, their experiences varied by team. When restrictions on face-to-face working are lifted, a blended approach of remote and face-to-face service delivery is recommended to optimise access and capacity while retaining effective and safe care.

17.
Lancet Psychiatry ; 7(10): 883-892, 2020 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-665107

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The potential impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on population mental health is of increasing global concern. We examine changes in adult mental health in the UK population before and during the lockdown. METHODS: In this secondary analysis of a national, longitudinal cohort study, households that took part in Waves 8 or 9 of the UK Household Longitudinal Study (UKHLS) panel, including all members aged 16 or older in April, 2020, were invited to complete the COVID-19 web survey on April 23-30, 2020. Participants who were unable to make an informed decision as a result of incapacity, or who had unknown postal addresses or addresses abroad were excluded. Mental health was assessed using the 12-item General Health Questionnaire (GHQ-12). Repeated cross-sectional analyses were done to examine temporal trends. Fixed-effects regression models were fitted to identify within-person change compared with preceding trends. FINDINGS: Waves 6-9 of the UKHLS had 53 351 participants. Eligible participants for the COVID-19 web survey were from households that took part in Waves 8 or 9, and 17 452 (41·2%) of 42 330 eligible people participated in the web survey. Population prevalence of clinically significant levels of mental distress rose from 18·9% (95% CI 17·8-20·0) in 2018-19 to 27·3% (26·3-28·2) in April, 2020, one month into UK lockdown. Mean GHQ-12 score also increased over this time, from 11·5 (95% CI 11·3-11·6) in 2018-19, to 12·6 (12·5-12·8) in April, 2020. This was 0·48 (95% CI 0·07-0·90) points higher than expected when accounting for previous upward trends between 2014 and 2018. Comparing GHQ-12 scores within individuals, adjusting for time trends and significant predictors of change, increases were greatest in 18-24-year-olds (2·69 points, 95% CI 1·89-3·48), 25-34-year-olds (1·57, 0·96-2·18), women (0·92, 0·50-1·35), and people living with young children (1·45, 0·79-2·12). People employed before the pandemic also averaged a notable increase in GHQ-12 score (0·63, 95% CI 0·20-1·06). INTERPRETATION: By late April, 2020, mental health in the UK had deteriorated compared with pre-COVID-19 trends. Policies emphasising the needs of women, young people, and those with preschool aged children are likely to play an important part in preventing future mental illness. FUNDING: None.


Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections/psychology , Mental Disorders/epidemiology , Pneumonia, Viral/psychology , Adolescent , Adult , Age Distribution , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19 , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Humans , Longitudinal Studies , Male , Middle Aged , Pandemics , Prevalence , Regression Analysis , Sampling Studies , Sex Distribution , Surveys and Questionnaires , United Kingdom/epidemiology , Young Adult
20.
Lancet Psychiatry ; 7(6): 547-560, 2020 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-60428

ABSTRACT

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic is having a profound effect on all aspects of society, including mental health and physical health. We explore the psychological, social, and neuroscientific effects of COVID-19 and set out the immediate priorities and longer-term strategies for mental health science research. These priorities were informed by surveys of the public and an expert panel convened by the UK Academy of Medical Sciences and the mental health research charity, MQ: Transforming Mental Health, in the first weeks of the pandemic in the UK in March, 2020. We urge UK research funding agencies to work with researchers, people with lived experience, and others to establish a high level coordination group to ensure that these research priorities are addressed, and to allow new ones to be identified over time. The need to maintain high-quality research standards is imperative. International collaboration and a global perspective will be beneficial. An immediate priority is collecting high-quality data on the mental health effects of the COVID-19 pandemic across the whole population and vulnerable groups, and on brain function, cognition, and mental health of patients with COVID-19. There is an urgent need for research to address how mental health consequences for vulnerable groups can be mitigated under pandemic conditions, and on the impact of repeated media consumption and health messaging around COVID-19. Discovery, evaluation, and refinement of mechanistically driven interventions to address the psychological, social, and neuroscientific aspects of the pandemic are required. Rising to this challenge will require integration across disciplines and sectors, and should be done together with people with lived experience. New funding will be required to meet these priorities, and it can be efficiently leveraged by the UK's world-leading infrastructure. This Position Paper provides a strategy that may be both adapted for, and integrated with, research efforts in other countries.


Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections/complications , Coronavirus Infections/psychology , Mental Disorders/complications , Mental Disorders/psychology , Pneumonia, Viral/complications , Pneumonia, Viral/psychology , Research , COVID-19 , Humans , Pandemics
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL