Living with COVID-19: Subjective Well-Being in the Second Phase of the Pandemic

There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

Abstract

While there is ample evidence of the decline in mental health among youth during the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, less is known about the determinants of recovery, which is the focus of this study. Drawing on a stress process framework, this study examines the associations of changes in direct, pandemic-related, and indirect, lockdown-related stressors with life satisfaction. A novel representative, longitudinal sample of British 16–25-year-olds is used, drawing on 6 data collections between February 2021 to May 2022 (N = 6000, 51% female, 24% ethnic minority, 46% in work, 35% with higher education). Using linear fixed-effects regression models, the findings suggest a substantial improvement in life satisfaction among youth. An increasing frequency of social contacts, receding worries about career prospects and job skills learning contributed significantly to increases in life satisfaction, whereas direct, health-related COVID-19 stressors did not affect life satisfaction. Sub-group analysis suggests that women’s, adolescents’, and students’ life satisfaction responded more strongly to the stressors considered in this study. The findings highlight the positive effects of less stringent lockdown restrictions, economic recovery, and opportunities for job skills learning on youth’s happiness.

Related collections

Most cited references 51

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Mental health before and during the COVID-19 pandemic: a longitudinal probability sample survey of the UK population

Matthias Pierce, Holly F Hope, Tamsin Ford … (2021)

Summary 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.

0 comments Cited 1298 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

A global panel database of pandemic policies (Oxford COVID-19 Government Response Tracker)

Thomas C. Hale, Noam Angrist, Rafael Goldszmidt … (2021)

COVID-19 has prompted unprecedented government action around the world. We introduce the Oxford COVID-19 Government Response Tracker (OxCGRT), a dataset that addresses the need for continuously updated, readily usable and comparable information on policy measures. From 1 January 2020, the data capture government policies related to closure and containment, health and economic policy for more than 180 countries, plus several countries' subnational jurisdictions. Policy responses are recorded on ordinal or continuous scales for 19 policy areas, capturing variation in degree of response. We present two motivating applications of the data, highlighting patterns in the timing of policy adoption and subsequent policy easing and reimposition, and illustrating how the data can be combined with behavioural and epidemiological indicators. This database enables researchers and policymakers to explore the empirical effects of policy responses on the spread of COVID-19 cases and deaths, as well as on economic and social welfare.

0 comments Cited 1241 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Global prevalence and burden of depressive and anxiety disorders in 204 countries and territories in 2020 due to the COVID-19 pandemic

(2021)

Background Before 2020, mental disorders were leading causes of the global health-related burden, with depressive and anxiety disorders being leading contributors to this burden. The emergence of the COVID-19 pandemic has created an environment where many determinants of poor mental health are exacerbated. The need for up-to-date information on the mental health impacts of COVID-19 in a way that informs health system responses is imperative. In this study, we aimed to quantify the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the prevalence and burden of major depressive disorder and anxiety disorders globally in 2020. Methods We conducted a systematic review of data reporting the prevalence of major depressive disorder and anxiety disorders during the COVID-19 pandemic and published between Jan 1, 2020, and Jan 29, 2021. We searched PubMed, Google Scholar, preprint servers, grey literature sources, and consulted experts. Eligible studies reported prevalence of depressive or anxiety disorders that were representative of the general population during the COVID-19 pandemic and had a pre-pandemic baseline. We used the assembled data in a meta-regression to estimate change in the prevalence of major depressive disorder and anxiety disorders between pre-pandemic and mid-pandemic (using periods as defined by each study) via COVID-19 impact indicators (human mobility, daily SARS-CoV-2 infection rate, and daily excess mortality rate). We then used this model to estimate the change from pre-pandemic prevalence (estimated using Disease Modelling Meta-Regression version 2.1 [known as DisMod-MR 2.1]) by age, sex, and location. We used final prevalence estimates and disability weights to estimate years lived with disability and disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) for major depressive disorder and anxiety disorders. Findings We identified 5683 unique data sources, of which 48 met inclusion criteria (46 studies met criteria for major depressive disorder and 27 for anxiety disorders). Two COVID-19 impact indicators, specifically daily SARS-CoV-2 infection rates and reductions in human mobility, were associated with increased prevalence of major depressive disorder (regression coefficient [ B ] 0·9 [95% uncertainty interval 0·1 to 1·8; p=0·029] for human mobility, 18·1 [7·9 to 28·3; p=0·0005] for daily SARS-CoV-2 infection) and anxiety disorders (0·9 [0·1 to 1·7; p=0·022] and 13·8 [10·7 to 17·0; p<0·0001]. Females were affected more by the pandemic than males ( B 0·1 [0·1 to 0·2; p=0·0001] for major depressive disorder, 0·1 [0·1 to 0·2; p=0·0001] for anxiety disorders) and younger age groups were more affected than older age groups (−0·007 [–0·009 to −0·006; p=0·0001] for major depressive disorder, −0·003 [–0·005 to −0·002; p=0·0001] for anxiety disorders). We estimated that the locations hit hardest by the pandemic in 2020, as measured with decreased human mobility and daily SARS-CoV-2 infection rate, had the greatest increases in prevalence of major depressive disorder and anxiety disorders. We estimated an additional 53·2 million (44·8 to 62·9) cases of major depressive disorder globally (an increase of 27·6% [25·1 to 30·3]) due to the COVID-19 pandemic, such that the total prevalence was 3152·9 cases (2722·5 to 3654·5) per 100 000 population. We also estimated an additional 76·2 million (64·3 to 90·6) cases of anxiety disorders globally (an increase of 25·6% [23·2 to 28·0]), such that the total prevalence was 4802·4 cases (4108·2 to 5588·6) per 100 000 population. Altogether, major depressive disorder caused 49·4 million (33·6 to 68·7) DALYs and anxiety disorders caused 44·5 million (30·2 to 62·5) DALYs globally in 2020. Interpretation This pandemic has created an increased urgency to strengthen mental health systems in most countries. Mitigation strategies could incorporate ways to promote mental wellbeing and target determinants of poor mental health and interventions to treat those with a mental disorder. Taking no action to address the burden of major depressive disorder and anxiety disorders should not be an option. Funding Queensland Health, National Health and Medical Research Council, and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.

0 comments Cited 1208 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

All references

Author and article information

Contributors

Golo Henseke:

ORCID: http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0669-2100

g.henseke@ucl.ac.uk

Bio :

Golo Henseke

works as Senior Research Associate with the LLAKES Centre at UCL Institute of Education, United Kingdom. His research interests include school-to-work transitions, educational choices, subjective wellbeing, and the role of job quality and learning for individual outcomes.

Francis Green:

Bio :

Francis Green

is Professor of Work and Education Economics in UCL Institute of Education, where he works at the LLAKES Centre. His research focuses on schools, skills and job quality, the graduate labour market, political economy and savings.

Ingrid Schoon:

Bio :

Ingrid Schoon

is Professor of Human Development and Social Policy at the Social Research Institute (SRI), University College London. Her research interests focus on the study of risk and resilience, social inequalities in capacity building, health and attainment during the transition from dependent childhood to independent adulthood.

Journal

Journal ID (nlm-ta): J Youth Adolesc

Journal ID (iso-abbrev): J Youth Adolesc

Title: Journal of Youth and Adolescence

Publisher: Springer US (New York )

ISSN (Print): 0047-2891

ISSN (Electronic): 1573-6601

Publication date (Electronic): 4 July 2022

Publication date PMC-release: 4 July 2022

Pages: 1-14

Affiliations

GRID grid.83440.3b, ISNI 0000000121901201, University College London, Institute of Education, LLAKES Centre, ; 20 Bedford Way, London, WC1H 0AL UK

Author information

Golo Henseke http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0669-2100

Article

Publisher ID: 1648

DOI: 10.1007/s10964-022-01648-8

PMC ID: 9252564

PubMed ID: 35788856

SO-VID: c34e00cd-e468-410a-ad80-925c5d5f32c9

License:

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

History

Date received : 11 April 2022

Date accepted : 16 June 2022

Funding

Funded by: FundRef https://doi.org/10.13039/http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100000269, Economic and Social Research Council;

Living with COVID-19: Subjective Well-Being in the Second Phase of the Pandemic

Read this article at

Abstract

Related collections

UCL: Covid-19 Research

Most cited references 51

Mental health before and during the COVID-19 pandemic: a longitudinal probability sample survey of the UK population

A global panel database of pandemic policies (Oxford COVID-19 Government Response Tracker)

Global prevalence and burden of depressive and anxiety disorders in 204 countries and territories in 2020 due to the COVID-19 pandemic

Author and article information

Contributors

Journal

Affiliations

Author information

Article

History

Funding

Categories

Comments

Comment on this article

Similar content 366

Cited by 6

Most referenced authors 681