Understanding inequalities in mental health by family structure during COVID-19 lockdowns: evidence from the UK Household Longitudinal Study

PURPOSE

The COVID-19 pandemic increased psychiatric distress and impacts differed by family structure. We aimed to identify mechanisms contributing to these inequalities.

METHODS

Survey data were from the UK Household Longitudinal Study. Psychiatric distress (GHQ-12) was measured in April 2020 (first UK lockdown; n = 10,516), and January 2021 (lockdown re-introduced following eased restrictions; n = 6,893). Pre-lockdown family structure comprised partner status and presence of children (< 16 years). Mediating mechanisms included: active employment, financial strain, childcare/home-schooling, caring, and loneliness. Monte Carlo g-computation simulations were used to adjust for confounding and estimate total effects and decompositions into: controlled direct effects (effects if the mediator was absent), and portions eliminated (PE; representing differential exposure and vulnerability to the mediator).

RESULTS

In January 2021, after adjustment, we estimated increased risk of distress among couples with children compared to couples with no children (RR: 1.48; 95% CI 1.15-1.82), largely because of childcare/home-schooling (PE RR: 1.32; 95% CI 1.00-1.64). Single respondents without children also had increased risk of distress compared to couples with no children (RR: 1.55; 95% CI 1.27-1.83), and the largest PE was for loneliness (RR: 1.16; 95% CI 1.05-1.27), though financial strain contributed (RR: 1.05; 95% CI 0.99-1.12). Single parents demonstrated the highest levels of distress, but confounder adjustment suggested uncertain effects with wide confidence intervals. Findings were similar in April 2020 and when stratified by sex.

CONCLUSION

Access to childcare/schooling, financial security and social connection are important mechanisms that need addressing to avoid widening mental health inequalities during public health crises.

Students' Perceptions of COVID-19 Stress and Internalizing Problems: Is Social Support a Buffer?

The current study investigated the associations among student perceptions of COVID-19 stress, internalizing problems, and school social support (teacher and classmate support) and how these relations differed across elementary/middle and high school students. Based on data from 526 4th- through 12th-grade students from a school district in the Northeast, we found that COVID-19-related stress was significantly related to internalizing problems for all students, regardless of grade level. We also found that teacher social support, but not classmate social support, buffered the positive relation between COVID-19 stress and internalizing problems. The results of the current study have implications for school psychologists, counselors, social workers, and other educators in alleviating COVID-19-related stress in students and associated symptoms of internalizing problems in students. As the pandemic unwinds, future research should examine the long-term impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic, especially for students with marginalized identities, and how teacher and/or peer support may play a role in buffering these stressors for students.

Anxiety, depression, and social connectedness among the general population of eight countries during the COVID-19 pandemic

Background

The COVID-19 pandemic affected the mental health of the general population through multiple pathways. The aim of this study was to examine anxiety, depression, self-confidence, and social connectedness among the general population of eight countries during the COVID-19 pandemic, their underlying factors, and vulnerable groups.

Methods

A web-based survey was administered to persons from the general population of China, Greece, Italy, Netherlands, Russia, Sweden, the United Kingdom, and the United States. The survey included the Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7 (GAD-7), Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) and items on self-confidence, social connectedness, and socio-demographics. Data were analyzed with descriptive statistics, exploratory factor analysis and regression analysis.

Results

Twenty-three thousand six hundred twenty-two respondents completed the survey. Overall, 42% of the total sample had mild to severe anxiety symptoms and 43% had mild to severe depression symptoms. 14% to 38% reported suboptimal ratings in self-confidence, social participation, contact with family and friends, and feeling connected to others. In the exploratory factor analyses, in most countries, one dominant factor had a high influence on GAD-7, PHQ-9 sum scores and self-confidence with eigenvalue (% variance) above 3.2 (53.9%). One less dominant factor had a high influence on social connectedness scores with eigenvalue (% variance) ranging above 0.8 (12.8%). Being younger, female, having chronic conditions, perceived as risky to COVID-19 infection, and feeling not very well protected against COVID-19 were significantly associated with the two underlying factors.

Conclusions

Anxiety, depression, and problems with self-confidence and social connectedness were highly prevalent in the general population of eight countries during the early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic. This highlights the importance of the allocation of additional resources to implement policies to mitigate the impact of the pandemic on mental health.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13690-022-00990-4.

Socioeconomic position and adverse childhood experiences as risk factors for health-related behaviour change and employment adversity during the COVID-19 pandemic: insights from a prospective cohort study in the UK

Background

Non-pharmaceutical interventions to reduce the spread of COVID-19 may have disproportionately affected already disadvantaged populations.

Methods

We analysed data from 2710 young adult participants of the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children. We assessed the associations of socioeconomic position (SEP) and Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACEs, e.g. abuse, neglect, measures of family dysfunction) with changes to health-related behaviours (meals, snacks, exercise, sleep, alcohol and smoking/vaping), and to financial and employment status during the first UK lockdown between March–June 2020.

Results

Experiencing 4+ ACEs was associated with reporting decreased sleep quantity during lockdown (OR 1.53, 95% CI: 1.07–2.18) and increased smoking and/or vaping (OR 1.85, 95% CI: 0.99–3.43); no other associations were seen between ACEs or SEP and health-related behaviour changes. Adverse financial and employment changes were more likely for people with low SEP and for people who had experienced multiple ACEs; e.g. a history of 4+ ACEs was associated with being furloughed or on other leave during lockdown (OR 1.92, 95% CI: 1.35–2.74).

Conclusions

In this sample of young adults, there was little evidence that lockdown worsened inequalities in health-related behaviours. However, adverse financial and employment consequences of lockdown were more likely to be experienced by people who have already experienced socioeconomic deprivation or childhood adversity, thereby widening social inequalities and demonstrating the need for support into adulthood for those with a history of ACEs.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12889-022-14184-8.

The consequences of a year of the COVID-19 pandemic for the mental health of young adult twins in England and Wales

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic has affected all our lives, not only through the infection itself but also through the measures taken to control the spread of the virus (e.g. lockdown).

AIMS

Here, we investigated how the COVID-19 pandemic and unprecedented lockdown affected the mental health of young adults in England and Wales.

METHOD

We compared the mental health symptoms of up to 4773 twins in their mid-20s in 2018 prior to the COVID-19 pandemic (T1) and during four-wave longitudinal data collection during the pandemic in April, July and October 2020, and in March 2021 (T2-T5) using phenotypic and genetic longitudinal designs.

RESULTS

The average changes in mental health were small to medium and mainly occurred from T1 to T2 (average Cohen d = 0.14). Despite the expectation of catastrophic effects of the pandemic on mental health, we did not observe trends in worsening mental health during the pandemic (T3-T5). Young people with pre-existing mental health problems were disproportionately affected at the beginning of the pandemic, but their increased problems largely subsided as the pandemic persisted. Twin analyses indicated that the aetiology of individual differences in mental health symptoms did not change during the lockdown (average heritability 33%); the average genetic correlation between T1 and T2-T5 was 0.95, indicating that genetic effects before the pandemic were substantially correlated with genetic effects up to a year later.

CONCLUSIONS

We conclude that on average the mental health of young adults in England and Wales has been remarkably resilient to the effects of the pandemic and associated lockdown.

Bias from questionnaire invitation and response in COVID-19 research: an example using ALSPAC

Background: Longitudinal studies are crucial for identifying potential risk factors for infection with, and consequences of, COVID-19, but relationships can be biased if they are associated with invitation and response to data collection. We describe factors relating to questionnaire invitation and response in COVID-19 questionnaire data collection in a multigenerational birth cohort (the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children, ALSPAC). Methods: We analysed online questionnaires completed between the beginning of the pandemic and easing of the first UK lockdown by participants with valid email addresses who had not actively disengaged from the study. We assessed associations of pre-pandemic sociodemographic, behavioural, anthropometric and health-related factors with: i) being sent a questionnaire; ii) returning a questionnaire; and iii) item response (for specific questions). Analyses were conducted in three cohorts: the index children born in the early 1990s (now young adults; 41 variables assessed), their mothers (35 variables) and the mothers' partners (27 variables). Results: Of 14,849 young adults, 41% were sent a questionnaire, of whom 57% returned one. Item response was >95%. In this cohort, 78% of factors were associated with being sent a questionnaire, 56% with returning one, and, as an example of item response, 20% with keyworker status response. For instance, children from mothers educated to degree-level had greater odds of being sent a questionnaire (OR=5.59; 95% CI=4.87-6.41), returning one (OR=1.60; 95% CI=1.31-1.95), and responding to items (e.g., keyworker status OR=1.65; 95% CI=0.88-3.04), relative to children from mothers with fewer qualifications. Invitation and response rates and associations were similar in all cohorts. Conclusions: These results highlight the importance of considering potential biases due to non-response when using longitudinal studies in COVID-19 research and interpreting results. We recommend researchers report response rates and factors associated with invitation and response in all COVID-19 observational research studies, which can inform sensitivity analyses.

The Impact of COVID-19 Related Social Distancing on Mental Health Outcomes: A Transdiagnostic Account

The COVID-19 pandemic, and the social distancing practices that followed, have been associated with increased prevalence of emotional disorders. However, not all individuals affected by COVID-19-related social distancing experienced elevations in emotional disorder symptoms. Understanding this phenomenon is of crucial public health significance given the burden of emotional disorders on individuals and systems. In this narrative review, we consider the differential impact of COVID-19-related social distancing on mental health outcomes from a transdiagnostic perspective. We argue that individuals high in negative affect and aversive reactivity to emotion, that is, neuroticism, and who respond to such emotional experiences with emotion-motivated avoidant coping, are most likely to experience emotional disorders in the context of COVID-19 social distancing. We acknowledge the pro-social and adaptive function of some types of avoidance during the pandemic, which may have initially buffered against negative mental health outcomes. Implications of this conceptualization for treatment of emotional disorders in the present sociocultural context are discussed.

The impact of the initial and second national COVID-19 lockdowns on mental health in young people with and without pre-existing depressive symptoms

BACKGROUND

The evidence on mental health during COVID-19 evolved fast, but still little is known about the long-lasting impact of the sequential lockdowns. We examine changes in young people's mental health from before to during the initial and second more prolonged lockdown, and whether women and those with pre-existing depressive symptoms were disproportionally impacted.

METHODS

Participants reported on mental health indicators in an ongoing 18-year data collection in the Danish National Birth Cohort and in a COVID-19 survey, including 8 data points: 7 in the initial lockdown, and 1 year post. Changes in quality of life (QoL), mental well-being, and loneliness were estimated with random effect linear regressions on longitudinal data (N = 32,985), and linear regressions on repeated cross-sections (N = 28,579).

FINDINGS

Interim deterioration in mental well-being and loneliness was observed during the initial lockdown, and only in those without pre-existing depressive symptoms. During the second lockdown, a modest deterioration was again observed for mental well-being and loneliness. QoL likewise only declined among those without pre-existing symptoms, where women showed a greater decline than men. QoL did not normalise during the initial lockdown and remained at lower levels during the second lockdown. These findings were not replicated in the repeated cross-sections.

INTERPRETATION

Except for an interim decrease in mental health, and only in those without pre-existing depressive symptoms, this study's findings do not suggest a substantial detrimental impact of the lockdowns.

Concerns about the social climate, finances, and COVID-19 risk on depression and anxiety: An analysis on U.S. young adults across two waves

Concerns regarding contracting COVID-19 and finances may be risks to mental health during the COVID-19 pandemic. Social climate concerns may be another risk, given U.S. protests taking place during this period. We tested the hypothesis that concerns about COVID-19 risk, finances, and social climate would predict clinically significant levels of depression, anxiety, and comorbid depression and anxiety in young adults. A total of 782 U.S. young adults (18-30 years), initially recruited through convenience sampling (social media, email listservs), completed online surveys at Wave 1 (April-August 2020) and Wave 2 (September 2020-March 2021). The primary outcomes included scoring above the cut off for depressive (PHQ-8 ≥ 10) or anxiety symptoms (GAD ≥10). Approximately 41% reported depression and 47% reported anxiety at Wave 1; rates did not differ at Wave 2. Individuals with greater financial concerns were 14% more likely to score high on depressive symptoms; those with COVID-19 risk concerns and social climate concerns were 21% and 54% more likely, respectively, to score high on generalized anxiety. Those with social climate and financial concerns were 52% and 15% more likely, respectively, to score high on comorbid depressive and anxiety symptoms. Analyses controlled for Wave 1 symptoms. We provide evidence highlighting the roles of social climate and COVID-19 risk concerns on anxiety, and financial concerns on depression in young adults. Public health campaigns should acknowledge broader societal issues that have taken place as a source of mental health distress, beyond those driven by the pandemic (e.g., isolation and lockdowns).

Psychological Distress Before and During the COVID-19 Pandemic Among Adults in the United Kingdom Based on Coordinated Analyses of 11 Longitudinal Studies

Importance

How population mental health has evolved across the COVID-19 pandemic under varied lockdown measures is poorly understood, and the consequences for health inequalities are unclear.

Objective

To investigate changes in mental health and sociodemographic inequalities from before and across the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic in 11 longitudinal studies.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This cohort study included adult participants from 11 UK longitudinal population-based studies with prepandemic measures of psychological distress. Analyses were coordinated across these studies, and estimates were pooled. Data were collected from 2006 to 2021.

Exposures

Trends in the prevalence of poor mental health were assessed in the prepandemic period (time period 0 [TP 0]) and at 3 pandemic TPs: 1, initial lockdown (March to June 2020); 2, easing of restrictions (July to October 2020); and 3, a subsequent lockdown (November 2020 to March 2021). Analyses were stratified by sex, race and ethnicity, education, age, and UK country.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Multilevel regression was used to examine changes in psychological distress from the prepandemic period across the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic. Psychological distress was assessed using the 12-item General Health Questionnaire, the Kessler 6, the 9-item Malaise Inventory, the Short Mood and Feelings Questionnaire, the 8-item or 9-item Patient Health Questionnaire, the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, and the Centre for Epidemiological Studies-Depression across different studies.

Results

In total, 49 993 adult participants (12 323 [24.6%] aged 55-64 years; 32 741 [61.2%] women; 4960 [8.7%] racial and ethnic minority) were analyzed. Across the 11 studies, mental health deteriorated from prepandemic scores across all 3 pandemic periods, but there was considerable heterogeneity across the study-specific estimated effect sizes (pooled estimate for TP 1: standardized mean difference [SMD], 0.15; 95% CI, 0.06-0.25; TP 2: SMD, 0.18; 95% CI, 0.09-0.27; TP 3: SMD, 0.21; 95% CI, 0.10-0.32). Changes in psychological distress across the pandemic were higher in women (TP 3: SMD, 0.23; 95% CI, 0.11, 0.35) than men (TP 3: SMD, 0.16; 95% CI, 0.06-0.26) and lower in individuals with below-degree level education at TP 3 (SMD, 0.18; 95% CI, 0.06-0.30) compared with those who held degrees (SMD, 0.26; 95% CI, 0.14-0.38). Increased psychological distress was most prominent among adults aged 25 to 34 years (SMD, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.14-0.84) and 35 to 44 years (SMD, 0.35; 95% CI, 0.10-0.60) compared with other age groups. No evidence of changes in distress differing by race and ethnicity or UK country were observed.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this study, the substantial deterioration in mental health seen in the UK during the first lockdown did not reverse when lockdown lifted, and a sustained worsening was observed across the pandemic period. Mental health declines have been unequal across the population, with women, those with higher degrees, and those aged 25 to 44 years more affected than other groups.

'You're just there, alone in your room with your thoughts': a qualitative study about the psychosocial impact of the COVID-19 pandemic among young people living in the UK

OBJECTIVES

Adolescents and young adults have been greatly affected by quarantine measures during the COVID-19 pandemic, but little is understood about how restrictions have affected their well-being, mental health, and social life. We therefore aimed to learn more about how UK quarantine measures affected the social lives, mental health and well-being of adolescents and young adults.

DESIGN

Qualitative interview study. The data were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis, with particular attention paid to contextual factors (such as age, gender, ethnicity and health status) when analysing each individual transcript.

SETTING

Data collection took place remotely across the UK via audio or video call, between June 2020 and January 2021.

PARTICIPANTS

We conducted semi-structured interviews with 37 participants (aged 13-24 years) to elicit their views.

RESULTS

Authors generated four themes during the qualitative analysis: (a) concerns about disruption to education, (b) missing social contact during lockdown, (c) changes to social relationships and (d) improved well-being during lockdown. Many participants said they struggled with a decline in mental health during the pandemic, lack of support and concern about socialising after the pandemic. However, some participants described experiences and changes brought on by the pandemic as helpful, including an increased awareness of mental health and feeling more at ease when talking about it, as well as stronger relationship ties with family members.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings suggest that young people may have felt more comfortable when talking about their mental health compared with prepandemic, in part facilitated by initiatives through schools, universities and employers. However, many were worried about how the pandemic has affected their education and social connections, and support for young people should be tailored accordingly around some of these concerns.

The Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children - A resource for COVID-19 research: Questionnaire data capture November 2020 - March 2021

The Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children (ALSPAC) is a prospective population-based cohort study which recruited pregnant women in 1990-1992 and has followed these women, their partners (Generation 0; G0) and their offspring (Generation 1; G1) ever since. The study has reacted rapidly and repeatedly to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, deploying online questionnaires throughout the pandemic. In November/December 2020, a fourth questionnaire was deployed asking about physical and mental health, lifestyle and behaviours, employment and finances. G0 participants were offered an online questionnaire between 17 th November 2020 and 7 th February 2021, while G1 participants were offered both online and paper questionnaires between 1 st December 2020 and 19 th March 2021. Of 15,844 invitations, 8,643 (55%) participants returned the questionnaire (3,101 original mothers [mean age 58.6 years], 1,172 original fathers/partners [mean age 61.5 years] and 4,370 offspring [mean age 28.4 years]). Of these 8,643 participants, 2,012 (23%) had not returned a previous COVID-19 questionnaire, while 3,575 (41%) had returned all three previous questionnaires. In this questionnaire, 300 participants (3.5%) reported a previous positive COVID-19 test, 110 (1.3%) had been told by a doctor they likely had COVID-19, and 759 (8.8%) suspected that they had had COVID-19. Based on self-reported symptoms, between October 2020 and February 2021 359 participants (4.2%) were predicted COVID-19 cases. COVID data is being complemented with linkage to health records and Public Health England pillar testing results as they become available. Data has been released as an update to the previous COVID-19 datasets. It comprises: 1) a standard dataset containing all participant responses to both questionnaires with key sociodemographic factors; and 2) as a composite release coordinating data from the existing resource, thus enabling bespoke research across all areas supported by the study. This data note describes the fourth questionnaire and the data obtained from it.

The consequences of a year of the COVID-19 pandemic for the mental health of young adult twins in England and Wales

The COVID-19 pandemic has impacted all our lives, not only through the infection itself, but also through the measures taken to control the virus’s spread (e.g., lockdown). Here we investigated how the COVID-19 pandemic and unprecedented lockdown affected the mental health of young adults in England and Wales. We compared the mental health symptoms of up to 4,000 twins in their mid-twenties in 2018 prior to the COVID-19 pandemic (T1) to those in a four-wave longitudinal data collection during the pandemic in April, July, and October 2020, and in March 2021 (T2-T5). The average changes in mental health were small-to-medium and mainly occurred from 2018 (T1) to March 2020 (T2, one month following the start of lockdown; average Cohen d=0.14). Despite the expectation of catastrophic effects on the pandemic on mental health of our young adults, we did not observe trends in worsening mental health during the pandemic (T3-T5). Young people with pre-existing mental health problems were adversely affected at the beginning of the pandemic, but their increased problems largely subsided as the pandemic persisted. Twin analyses indicated that the aetiology of individual differences did not change during the lockdown. The average heritability of mental health symptoms was 33% across 5 waves of assessment, and the average genetic correlation between T1 and T2-T5 was .95, indicating that genetic effects before the pandemic (T1) are substantially correlated with genetic effects up to a year later (T2-T5). We conclude that on average the mental health of young adults in England and Wales has been remarkably resilient to the effects of the pandemic and associated lockdown.

Bias from questionnaire invitation and response in COVID-19 research: an example using ALSPAC

Background: Longitudinal studies are crucial for identifying potential risk factors for infection with, and consequences of, COVID-19, but relationships can be biased if they are associated with invitation and response to data collection. We describe factors relating to questionnaire invitation and response in COVID-19 questionnaire data collection in a multigenerational birth cohort (the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children, ALSPAC). Methods: We analysed online questionnaires completed between the beginning of the pandemic and easing of the first UK lockdown by participants with valid email addresses who had not actively disengaged from the study. We assessed associations of pre-pandemic sociodemographic, behavioural, anthropometric and health-related factors with: i) being sent a questionnaire; ii) returning a questionnaire; and iii) item response (for specific questions). Analyses were conducted in three cohorts: the index children born in the early 1990s (now young adults; 41 variables assessed), their mothers (35 variables) and the mothers' partners (27 variables). Results: Of 14,849 young adults, 41% were sent a questionnaire, of whom 57% returned one. Item response was >95%. In this cohort, 78% of factors were associated with being sent a questionnaire, 56% with returning one, and, as an example of item response, 20% with keyworker status response. For instance, children from mothers educated to degree-level had greater odds of being sent a questionnaire (OR=5.59; 95% CI=4.87-6.41), returning one (OR=1.60; 95% CI=1.31-1.95), and responding to items (e.g., keyworker status OR=1.65; 95% CI=0.88-3.04), relative to children from mothers with fewer qualifications. Invitation and response rates and associations were similar in all cohorts. Conclusions: These results highlight the importance of considering potential biases due to non-response when using longitudinal studies in COVID-19 research and interpreting results. We recommend researchers report response rates and factors associated with invitation and response in all COVID-19 observational research studies, which can inform sensitivity analyses.

The Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children - A resource for COVID-19 research: Questionnaire data capture November 2020 - March 2021

The Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children (ALSPAC) is a prospective population-based cohort study which recruited pregnant women in 1990-1992 and has followed these women, their partners (Generation 0; G0) and their offspring (Generation 1; G1) ever since. The study has reacted rapidly and repeatedly to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, deploying online questionnaires throughout the pandemic. In November/December 2020, a fourth questionnaire was deployed asking about physical and mental health, lifestyle and behaviours, employment and finances. G0 participants were offered an online questionnaire between 17 th November 2020 and 7 th February 2021, while G1 participants were offered both online and paper questionnaires between 1 st December 2020 and 19 th March 2021. Of 15,844 invitations, 8,643 (55%) participants returned the questionnaire (3,101 original mothers [mean age 58.6 years], 1,172 original fathers/partners [mean age 61.5 years] and 4,370 offspring [mean age 28.4 years]). Of these 8,643 participants, 2,012 (23%) had not returned a previous COVID-19 questionnaire, while 3,575 (41%) had returned all three previous questionnaires. In this questionnaire, 300 participants (3.5%) reported a previous positive COVID-19 test, 110 (1.3%) had been told by a doctor they likely had COVID-19, and 759 (8.8%) suspected that they had had COVID-19. Based on self-reported symptoms, between October 2020 and February 2021 359 participants (4.2%) were predicted COVID-19 cases. COVID data is being complemented with linkage to health records and Public Health England pillar testing results as they become available. Data has been released as an update to the previous COVID-19 datasets. It comprises: 1) a standard dataset containing all participant responses to both questionnaires with key sociodemographic factors; and 2) as a composite release coordinating data from the existing resource, thus enabling bespoke research across all areas supported by the study. This data note describes the fourth questionnaire and the data obtained from it.

The Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children - A resource for COVID-19 research: Generation 2 questionnaire data capture May-July 2020

The Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children (ALSPAC) is a prospective population-based cohort study which recruited pregnant women in 1990-1992 from the Bristol area (UK). ALSPAC has followed these women, their partners (Generation 0; G0) and their offspring (Generation 1; G1) ever since. From 2012, ALSPAC has identified G1 participants who were pregnant (or their partner was) or had become parents, and enrolled them, their partners, and children in the ALSPAC-Generation 2 (ALSPAC-G2) study, providing a unique multi-generational cohort. At present, approximately 1,100 G2 children (excluding those in utero) from 810 G1 participants have been enrolled. In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, ALSPAC rapidly deployed two online questionnaires; one during the initial lockdown phase in 2020 (9 th April-15 th May), and another when national lockdown restrictions were eased (26 th May-5 th July). As part of this second questionnaire, G1 parents completed a questionnaire about each of their G2 children. This covered: parental reports of children's feelings and behaviour since lockdown, school attendance, contact patterns, and health. A total of 289 G1 participants completed this questionnaire on behalf of 411 G2 children. This COVID-19 G2 questionnaire data can be combined with pre-pandemic ALSPAC-G2 data, plus ALSPAC-G1 and -G0 data, to understand how children's health and behaviour has been affected by the pandemic and its management. Data from this questionnaire will be complemented with linkage to health records and results of biological testing as they become available. Prospective studies are necessary to understand the impact of this pandemic on children's health and development, yet few relevant studies exist; this resource will aid these efforts. Data has been released as: 1) a freely-available dataset containing participant responses with key sociodemographic variables; and 2) an ALSPAC-held dataset which can be combined with existing ALSPAC data, enabling bespoke research across all areas supported by the study.

Depressive and Anxiety Symptoms Among People Under Quarantine During the COVID-19 Epidemic in China: A Cross-Sectional Study

Background: During the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, quarantine as an effective public health measure has been widely used in China and elsewhere to slow down the spread, while high-risk psychological response populations remain under-reported. Objective: The aim of the study is to investigate the depressive and anxiety symptoms among the high-risk individuals quarantined during the COVID-19 pandemic in China. Methods: An online survey was conducted from February 29 to April 10, 2020, among individuals quarantined for at least 2 weeks due to the high-risk exposure. Chinese versions of the nine-item Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) with a seven-item Generalized Anxiety Disorder (GAD-7) were applied to assess depressive and anxiety symptoms, respectively. Compliance with quarantine and knowledge of COVID-19 was also assessed. An unconditional logistic regression model was performed to identify the correlators. Results: Of the 1,260 participants completing the full survey, 14.0% (95% CI: 12.2-16.1%), 7.1% (95% CI: 5.9-8.7%), and 6.3% (95% CI: 5.1-7.8%) had at least moderate symptoms of depression, anxiety, and a combination of depression and anxiety (CDA), respectively; 14.8% (95% CI: 13.0-16.9%) had at least one condition. Multivariate analysis showed that participants with an undergraduate or above degree were more likely to report depressive (OR = 2.98, 95% CI: 1.56-5.72) and anxiety symptoms (OR = 2.95, 95% CI: 1.14-7.63) than those with middle school education. Those who were unemployed (OR = 0.37, 95% CI: 0.21-0.65 for depression; OR = 0.31, 95% CI: 0.14-0.73 for anxiety), students (OR = 0.14, 95% CI: 0.04-0.48 for depression; OR = 0.11, 95% CI: 0.01-0.85 for anxiety), and more knowledgeable of COVID-19 (OR = 0.84, 95% CI: 0.73-0.96 for depression, OR = 0.82, 95% CI: 0.68-0.98 for anxiety) were less likely to report depressive and anxiety symptoms. Higher quarantine compliance correlated with lower risks of depressive (OR = 0.94, 95% CI: 0.91-0.96) and anxiety symptoms (OR = 0.95, 95% CI: 0.91-0.98). Conclusion: Individuals under quarantine during the COVID-19 pandemic suffered prevalent depressive and anxiety symptoms. Consequently, comprehensive interventional measures, including knowledge dissemination, timely virus tests, and strengthened communication, may minimize quarantine's adverse effects.

The Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children - A resource for COVID-19 research: Generation 2 questionnaire data capture May-July 2020

The Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children (ALSPAC) is a prospective population-based cohort study which recruited pregnant women in 1990-1992 from the Bristol area (UK). ALSPAC has followed these women, their partners (Generation 0; G0) and their offspring (Generation 1; G1) ever since. From 2012, ALSPAC has identified G1 participants who were pregnant (or their partner was) or had become parents, and enrolled them, their partners, and children in the ALSPAC-Generation 2 (ALSPAC-G2) study, providing a unique multi-generational cohort. At present, approximately 1,100 G2 children (excluding those in utero) from 810 G1 participants have been enrolled. In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, ALSPAC rapidly deployed two online questionnaires; one during the initial lockdown phase in 2020 (9 th April-15 th May), and another when national lockdown restrictions were eased (26 th May-5 th July). As part of this second questionnaire, G1 parents completed a questionnaire about each of their G2 children. This covered: parental reports of children's feelings and behaviour since lockdown, school attendance, contact patterns, and health. A total of 289 G1 participants completed this questionnaire on behalf of 411 G2 children. This COVID-19 G2 questionnaire data can be combined with pre-pandemic ALSPAC-G2 data, plus ALSPAC-G1 and -G0 data, to understand how children's health and behaviour has been affected by the pandemic and its management. Data from this questionnaire will be complemented with linkage to health records and results of biological testing as they become available. Prospective studies are necessary to understand the impact of this pandemic on children's health and development, yet few relevant studies exist; this resource will aid these efforts. Data has been released as: 1) a freely-available dataset containing participant responses with key sociodemographic variables; and 2) an ALSPAC-held dataset which can be combined with existing ALSPAC data, enabling bespoke research across all areas supported by the study.