A qualitative study about how families coped with managing their well-being, children’s physical activity and education during the COVID-19 school closures in England

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

In 2020, schools in England closed for six months due to COVID-19, resulting in children being home-schooled. There is limited understanding about the impacts of this on children’s mental and physical health and their education. Therefore, we explored how families coped with managing these issues during the school closures. We conducted 30 qualitative interviews with parents of children aged 18 years and under (who would usually be in school) between 16 and 21 April 2020. We identified three themes and eight sub-themes that impacted how families coped whilst schools were closed. We found that family dynamics, circumstances, and resources (Theme 1), changes in entertainment activities and physical movement (Theme 2) and worries about the COVID-19 pandemic (Theme 3) impacted how well families were able to cope. A key barrier to coping was struggles with home-schooling (e.g., lack of resources and support from the school). However, parents being more involved in their children’s personal development and education were considered a benefit to home-schooling. Managing the lack of entertainment activities and in-person interactions, and additional health worries about loved ones catching COVID-19 were challenges for families. Parents reported adverse behaviour changes in their children, although overall, they reported they were coping well. However, pre-existing social and educational inequalities are at risk of exacerbation. Families with more resources (e.g., parental supervision, access to green space, technology to facilitate home-schooling and no special educational needs) were better able to cope when schools were closed. On balance, however, families appeared to be able to adapt to the schools being closed. We suggest that policy should focus on supporting families to mitigate the widening health and educational gap between families with more and less resources.

Related collections

Most cited references 52

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ): a 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups.

A Tong, P SAINSBURY, J. Craig (2007)

Qualitative research explores complex phenomena encountered by clinicians, health care providers, policy makers and consumers. Although partial checklists are available, no consolidated reporting framework exists for any type of qualitative design. To develop a checklist for explicit and comprehensive reporting of qualitative studies (in depth interviews and focus groups). We performed a comprehensive search in Cochrane and Campbell Protocols, Medline, CINAHL, systematic reviews of qualitative studies, author or reviewer guidelines of major medical journals and reference lists of relevant publications for existing checklists used to assess qualitative studies. Seventy-six items from 22 checklists were compiled into a comprehensive list. All items were grouped into three domains: (i) research team and reflexivity, (ii) study design and (iii) data analysis and reporting. Duplicate items and those that were ambiguous, too broadly defined and impractical to assess were removed. Items most frequently included in the checklists related to sampling method, setting for data collection, method of data collection, respondent validation of findings, method of recording data, description of the derivation of themes and inclusion of supporting quotations. We grouped all items into three domains: (i) research team and reflexivity, (ii) study design and (iii) data analysis and reporting. The criteria included in COREQ, a 32-item checklist, can help researchers to report important aspects of the research team, study methods, context of the study, findings, analysis and interpretations.

0 comments Cited 7931 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Standards for reporting qualitative research: a synthesis of recommendations.

Bridget O’Brien, Ilene Harris, Thomas Beckman … (2014)

Standards for reporting exist for many types of quantitative research, but currently none exist for the broad spectrum of qualitative research. The purpose of the present study was to formulate and define standards for reporting qualitative research while preserving the requisite flexibility to accommodate various paradigms, approaches, and methods.

0 comments Cited 2368 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Rapid Systematic Review: The Impact of Social Isolation and Loneliness on the Mental Health of Children and Adolescents in the Context of COVID-19

Maria Loades, Eleanor Chatburn, Nina Higson-Sweeney … (2020)

Objective Disease containment of COVID-19 has necessitated widespread social isolation. We aimed to establish what is known about how loneliness and disease containment measures impact on the mental health in children and adolescents. Method For this rapid review, we searched MEDLINE, PSYCHINFO, and Web of Science for articles published between 01/01/1946 and 03/29/2020. 20% of articles were double screened using pre-defined criteria and 20% of data was double extracted for quality assurance. Results 83 articles (80 studies) met inclusion criteria. Of these, 63 studies reported on the impact of social isolation and loneliness on the mental health of previously healthy children and adolescents (n=51,576; mean age 15.3) 61 studies were observational; 18 were longitudinal and 43 cross sectional studies assessing self-reported loneliness in healthy children and adolescents. One of these studies was a retrospective investigation after a pandemic. Two studies evaluated interventions. Studies had a high risk of bias although longitudinal studies were of better methodological quality. Social isolation and loneliness increased the risk of depression, and possibly anxiety at the time loneliness was measured and between 0.25 to 9 years later. Duration of loneliness was more strongly correlated with mental health symptoms than intensity of loneliness. Conclusion Children and adolescents are probably more likely to experience high rates of depression and probably anxiety during and after enforced isolation ends. This may increase as enforced isolation continues. Clinical services should offer preventative support and early intervention where possible and be prepared for an increase in mental health problems.

0 comments Cited 928 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

All references

Author and article information

Contributors

Lisa Woodland:

ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2440-3210

Role: ConceptualizationRole: Data curationRole: Formal analysisRole: InvestigationRole: MethodologyRole: Project administrationRole: VisualizationRole: Writing – original draft

Ava Hodson: Role: InvestigationRole: Writing – review & editing

Rebecca K. Webster: Role: ConceptualizationRole: Funding acquisitionRole: SupervisionRole: Writing – review & editing

Richard Amlôt: Role: ConceptualizationRole: Funding acquisitionRole: MethodologyRole: SupervisionRole: Writing – review & editing

Louise E. Smith: Role: ConceptualizationRole: MethodologyRole: Writing – review & editing

G. James Rubin: Role: ConceptualizationRole: Funding acquisitionRole: MethodologyRole: ResourcesRole: SupervisionRole: Writing – review & editing

Prabhat Mittal: Role: Editor

Journal

Journal ID (nlm-ta): PLoS One

Journal ID (iso-abbrev): PLoS One

Journal ID (publisher-id): plos

Title: PLOS ONE

Publisher: Public Library of Science (San Francisco, CA USA )

ISSN (Electronic): 1932-6203

Publication date (Electronic): 22 December 2022

Publication date Collection: 2022

Publication date PMC-release: 22 December 2022

Volume: 17

Issue: 12

Electronic Location Identifier: e0279355

Affiliations

[1 ] Department of Psychological Medicine, King’s College London, London, United Kingdom

[2 ] NIHR Health Protection Research Unit in Emergency Preparedness and Response, England

[3 ] Department of War Studies, King’s College London, London, United Kingdom

[4 ] Department of Psychology, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, United Kingdom

[5 ] Behavioural Science and Insights Unit, UK Health Security Agency, Salisbury, United Kingdom

Satyawati College (Eve.), University of Delhi, INDIA

Author notes

Competing Interests: GJR, RA and LS participated in the UK’s Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies, or its subgroups. These groups did not fund the study or authors. RA is an employee of the UK Health Security Agency. The author interests do not alter our adherence to PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials.

* E-mail: lisa.woodland@ 123456kcl.ac.uk

Author information

Lisa Woodland https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2440-3210

Article

Publisher ID: PONE-D-22-21321

DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0279355

PMC ID: 9778504

PubMed ID: 36548349

SO-VID: d260a857-dbbd-4037-94c6-aac1e942cdf0

License:

This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

History

Date received : 29 July 2022

Date accepted : 6 December 2022

Page count

Figures: 0, Tables: 4, Pages: 34

Funding

Funded by: Economic and Social Research Council

Award ID: ES/P000703/1

Award Recipient :

ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2440-3210

Lisa Woodland