To examine the impact of relationship status on levels of stress, anxiety, and depression during the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic to identify relationship status groups who are at greater risk of mental health difficulties.

The sample was drawn from individuals who subscribed to the Text4Hope program, a cognitive behavioral therapy inspired text messaging service developed to support Albertans during the COVID-19 pandemic. A survey link was sent to the subscribers to ascertain their relationship status and assess psychopathology using the Perceived Stress Scale-10 (PSS-10), Generalized Anxiety Disorder 7-item (GAD-7) scale, and Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9). Data analysis was carried out using SPSS-26 for descriptive statistics.

Within the first 6 weeks of the pandemic, 8267 of 44·992 subscribers responded to the online survey giving a response rate of 19.4%. Mean scores on the PSS, GAD-7, and PHQ-9 were highest among those who were single and lowest among those who were widowed. Overall, mean scores on the PHQ-9 were higher in groups who self-identified as separated or divorced when compared with groups who identified as having partners, including the categories of married or cohabiting.

Relationship status during the COVID-19 pandemic has an influence on the mental health of individuals. Our findings highlight relationship groups at risk of mental health problems during the pandemic and for whom treatments and mitigation should be targeted.

The coronavirus [coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)] pandemic has introduced extraordinary life changes and stress, particularly in adolescents and young adults. Initial reports suggest that depression and anxiety are elevated during COVID-19, but no prior study has explored changes at the within-person level. The current study explored changes in depression and anxiety symptoms from before the pandemic to soon after it first peaked in Spring 2020 in a sample of adolescents and young adults (N = 451) living in Long Island, New York, an early epicenter of COVID-19 in the U.S.

Depression (Children's Depression Inventory) and anxiety symptoms (Screen for Child Anxiety Related Symptoms) were assessed between December 2014 and July 2019, and, along with COVID-19 experiences, symptoms were re-assessed between March 27th and May 15th, 2020.

Across participants and independent of age, there were increased generalized anxiety and social anxiety symptoms. In females, there were also increased depression and panic/somatic symptoms. Multivariable linear regression indicated that greater COVID-19 school concerns were uniquely associated with increased depression symptoms. Greater COVID-19 home confinement concerns were uniquely associated with increased generalized anxiety symptoms, and decreased social anxiety symptoms, respectively.

Adolescents and young adults at an early epicenter of the COVID-19 pandemic in the U.S. experienced increased depression and anxiety symptoms, particularly amongst females. School and home confinement concerns related to the pandemic were independently associated with changes in symptoms. Overall, this report suggests that the COVID-19 pandemic is having multifarious adverse effects on the mental health of youth.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic led to measures that reduced social contact and support. We explored whether UK residents with more frequent or supportive social contact had fewer depressive symptoms during March−August 2020, and potential factors moderating the relationship.

A convenience sample of UK dwelling participants aged ⩾18 in the internet-based longitudinal COVID-19 Social Study completed up to 22 weekly questionnaires about face-to-face and phone/video social contact frequency, perceived social support, and depressive symptoms using the PHQ-9. Mixed linear models examined associations between social contact and support, and depressive symptoms. We examined for interaction by empathic concern, perspective taking and pre-COVID social contact frequency.

In 71 117 people with mean age 49 years (standard deviation 15), those with high perceived social support scored 1.836 (1.801–1.871) points lower on PHQ-9 than those with low support. Daily face-to-face or phone/video contact was associated with lower depressive symptoms (0.258 (95% confidence interval 0.225–0.290) and 0.117 (0.080–0.154), respectively) compared to no contact. The negative association between social relationships and depressive symptoms was stronger for those with high empathic concern, perspective taking and usual sociability.

We found during lockdown that those with higher quality or more face-to-face or phone/video contact had fewer depressive symptoms. Contact quality was more strongly associated than quantity. People who were usually more sociable or had higher empathy had more depressive symptoms during enforced reduced contact. The results have implications for COVID-19 and potential future pandemic management, and for understanding the relationship between social factors and mental health.

1. (1) To recognise moral injury where it arises alongside PTSD.

2. (2) To understand how Ehlers and Clark’s cognitive model of PTSD can be applied to moral injury.

3. (3) To be able to apply cognitive therapy for PTSD to patients with moral injury-related PTSD.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic had brought negative consequences and new stressors to mothers. The current study aims to compare factors predicting maternal mental health during the COVID-19 lockdown in China, Italy, and the Netherlands.

The sample consisted of 900 Dutch, 641 Italian, and 922 Chinese mothers (age M = 36.74, s.d. = 5.58) who completed an online questionnaire during the lockdown. Ten-fold cross-validation models were applied to explore the predictive performance of related factors for maternal mental health, and also to test similarities and differences between the countries.

COVID-19-related stress and family conflict are risk factors and resilience is a protective factor in association with maternal mental health in each country. Despite these shared factors, unique best models were identified for each of the three countries. In Italy, maternal age and poor physical health were related to more mental health symptoms, while in the Netherlands maternal high education and unemployment were associated with mental health symptoms. In China, having more than one child, being married, and grandparental support for mothers were important protective factors lowering the risk for mental health symptoms. Moreover, high SES (mother's high education, high family income) and poor physical health were found to relate to high levels of mental health symptoms among Chinese mothers.

These findings are important for the identification of at-risk mothers and the development of mental health promotion programs during COVID-19 and future pandemics.

The COVID-19 pandemic has caused unprecedented stress and fear throughout the world.

To evaluate the psychological effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on the Saudi public, and to examine the performance of the Arabic version of the Four-Dimensional Symptom Questionnaire (4DSQ) scale.

We conducted an online questionnaire-based cross-sectional survey of a sample of the Saudi public.

The study included 347 participants, who reported significantly higher levels of distress, depressive symptoms, anxiety symptoms and somatisation compared with a normative sample. Females scored higher in terms of somatisation, depression and anxiety symptoms, and distress. Obtaining COVID-19 information from friends and relatives was associated with higher levels of somatisation, depression and anxiety symptoms, and distress. Cronbach's alpha was 0.93 for the distress scale, 0.88 for the depression scale, 0.88 for the anxiety scale and 0.86 for the somatisation scale.

Levels of psychological distress were high among the Saudi public during the COVID-19 pandemic. We found high reliability for the Arabic version of the 4DSQ scale. However, three items did not conform to the four-factor structure, namely, item 1: ‘During the past week, did you suffer from dizziness or feeling light-headed?’, item 20: ‘During the past week, did you suffer from disturbed sleep?’ and item 46: ‘During the past week did you ever think I wish I was dead?’.

COVID-19 was declared a pandemic in March 2020, by the World Health Organization. The pandemic has had unprecedented worldwide implications, in particular on marginalized populations.

The aim of this study is to review the impact of the pandemic on patients with schizophrenia spectrum disorders.

A number of databases were searched for this review, including PubMed, EMBASE, PsycINFO and Google Scholar. Search terms included psychosis and COVID-19, schizophrenia and COVID-19, and severe mental illness and COVID-19. We included all English language papers and preprints. The final search was done on 15 July 2020.

Forty-seven relevant studies were identified and included in this review. Studies were summarised into five main subcategories: potential impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on physical health outcomes of patients with schizophrenia spectrum disorders, impact on mental health outcomes, review of case reports and case series to date, treatment recommendation guidelines and risk of increased prevalence of psychosis.

Patients with schizophrenia spectrum disorders may be vulnerable to the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic. This patient population has a number of risk factors, including psychosocial adversities and illness related factors. Continuous monitoring and long-term studies of the impact of the pandemic on this patient population are required.

Secure forensic mental health services treat patients with high rates of treatment-resistant psychoses. High rates of obesity and medical comorbidities are common. Population-based studies have identified high-risk groups in the event of SARS-CoV-2 infection, including those with problems such as obesity, lung disease and immune-compromising conditions. Structured assessment tools exist to ascertain the risk of adverse outcome in the event of SARS-CoV-2 infection.

To assess risk of adverse outcome in the event of SARS-CoV-2 infection in a complete population of forensic psychiatry patients using structured assessment tools.

All patients of a national forensic mental health service (n = 141) were rated for risk of adverse outcome in the event of SARS-CoV-2 infection, using two structured tools, the COVID-Age tool and the COVID-Risk tool.

We found high rates of relevant physical comorbidities. Mean chronological age was 45.5 years (s.d. = 11.4, median 44.1), mean score on the COVID-Age tool was 59.1 years (s.d. = 19.4, median 58.0), mean difference was 13.6 years (s.d. = 15.6), paired t = 10.9, d.f. = 140, P < 0.001. Three patients (2.1%) were chronologically over 70 years of age, compared with 43 (30.5%) with a COVID-Age over 70 (χ2 = 6.99, d.f. = 1, P = 0.008, Fisher's exact test P = 0.027).

Patients in secure forensic psychiatric services represent a high-risk group for adverse outcomes in the event of SARS-COV-2 infection. Population-based guidance on self-isolation and other precautions based on chronological age may not be sufficient. There is an urgent need for better physical health research and treatment in this group.

To explore the impact of COVID-19 public health restrictions on the lives of older adults living in Uganda.

Qualitative semi-structured interview study.

Participants’ homes.

Older adults living in Uganda (aged 60+).

Older adults in Uganda were interviewed over the phone and asked about their lives before and since COVID-19, and how public health restrictions have affected their lives. Semi-structured interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed and translated into English. Transcripts were thematically analyzed and themes generated in discussion.

In total, 30 older adults participated in the study. Five themes were identified: (1) economic impacts; (2) lack of access to basic necessities; (3) impact on healthcare utilization; (4) social impacts and (5) violent reinforcement of public health restrictions. COVID-19 public health restrictions had severe impacts on their lives, with many people having not enough food to eat due to lack of income, and being unable to pay their grandchildren’s school fees. Steep rises in public transport fares and an overall avoidance of transport also resulted in a lack of access to healthcare services and difficulty in getting food. Restrictions were violently reinforced by security guards.

Public health restrictions have a severe impact not only on older adults but also on the whole family in Uganda. Governmental strategies to contain the virus need to provide more support to enable people to get basic necessities and live as normal a life as possible.

Healthcare workers exposed to coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) patients could be psychologically distressed. This study aims to assess the magnitude of psychological distress and associated factors among hospital staff during the COVID-19 pandemic in a large tertiary hospital located in north-east Italy.

All healthcare and administrative staff working in the Verona University Hospital (Veneto, Italy) during the COVID-19 pandemic were asked to complete a web-based survey from 21 April to 6 May 2020. Symptoms of post-traumatic distress, anxiety and depression were assessed, respectively, using the Impact of Event Scale (IES-R), the Self-rating Anxiety Scale (SAS) and the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9). Personal socio-demographic information and job characteristics were also collected, including gender, age, living condition, having pre-existing psychological problems, occupation, length of working experience, hospital unit (ICUs and sub-intensive COVID-19 units vs. non-COVID-19 units). A multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to identify factors associated with each of the three mental health outcomes.

A total of 2195 healthcare workers (36.9% of the overall hospital staff) participated in the study. Of the participants, 35.7% were nurses, 24.3% other healthcare staff, 16.4% residents, 13.9% physicians and 9.7% administrative staff. Nine per cent of healthcare staff worked in ICUs, 8% in sub-intensive COVID-19 units and 7.6% in other front-line services, while the remaining staff worked in hospital units not directly engaged with COVID-19 patients. Overall, 63.2% of participants reported COVID-related traumatic experiences at work and 53.8% (95% CI 51.0%–56.6%) showed symptoms of post-traumatic distress; moreover, 50.1% (95% CI 47.9%–52.3%) showed symptoms of clinically relevant anxiety and 26.6% (95% CI 24.7%–28.5%) symptoms of at least moderate depression. Multivariable logistic regressions showed that women, nurses, healthcare workers directly engaged with COVID-19 patients and those with pre-existing psychological problems were at increased risk of psychopathological consequences of the pandemic.

The psychological impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on healthcare staff working in a highly burdened geographical of north-east Italy is relevant and to some extent greater than that reported in China. The study provides solid grounds to elaborate and implement interventions pertaining to psychology and occupational health.

Loneliness and physical activity are important targets for research into the impact of COVID-19 because they have established links with mental health, could be exacerbated by social distancing policies, and are potentially modifiable. In this study, we aimed to identify whether loneliness and physical activity were associated with worse mental health during a period of mandatory social distancing in the UK.

Population-based observational cohort study.

Mental health data collected online during COVID-19 from an existing sample of adults aged 50 and over taking part in a longitudinal study of aging. All had comparable annual data collected between 2015 and 2019.

Three-thousand two-hundred and eighty-one participants aged 50 and over.

Trajectories of depression (measured by PHQ-9) and anxiety (measured by GAD-7) between 2015 and 2020 were analyzed with respect to loneliness, physical activity levels, and a number of socioeconomic and demographic characteristics using zero-inflated negative binomial regression.

In 2020, PHQ-9 score for loneliness, adjusted for covariates, was 3.23 (95% CI: 3.01–3.44), an increase of around 1 point on all previous years in this group and 2 points higher than people not rated lonely, whose score did not change in 2020 (1.22, 95% CI: 1.12–1.32). PHQ-9 was 2.60 (95% CI: 2.43–2.78) in people with decreased physical activity, an increase of .5 on previous years. In contrast, PHQ-9 in 2020 for people whose physical activity had not decreased was 1.66, 95% CI: 1.56−1.75, similar to previous years. A similar relationship was observed for GAD-7 though the absolute burden of symptoms lower.

After accounting for pre-COVID-19 trends, we show that experiencing loneliness and decreased physical activity are risk factors for worsening mental health during the pandemic. Our findings highlight the need to examine policies which target these potentially modifiable risk factors.

Our aim was to estimate provisional willingness to receive a coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine, identify predictive socio-demographic factors, and, principally, determine potential causes in order to guide information provision.

A non-probability online survey was conducted (24th September−17th October 2020) with 5,114 UK adults, quota sampled to match the population for age, gender, ethnicity, income, and region. The Oxford COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy scale assessed intent to take an approved vaccine. Structural equation modelling estimated explanatory factor relationships.

71.7% (n=3,667) were willing to be vaccinated, 16.6% (n=849) were very unsure, and 11.7% (n=598) were strongly hesitant. An excellent model fit (RMSEA=0.05/CFI=0.97/TLI=0.97), explaining 86% of variance in hesitancy, was provided by beliefs about the collective importance, efficacy, side-effects, and speed of development of a COVID-19 vaccine. A second model, with reasonable fit (RMSEA=0.03/CFI=0.93/TLI=0.92), explaining 32% of variance, highlighted two higher-order explanatory factors: ‘excessive mistrust’ (r=0.51), including conspiracy beliefs, negative views of doctors, and need for chaos, and ‘positive healthcare experiences’ (r=−0.48), including supportive doctor interactions and good NHS care. Hesitancy was associated with younger age, female gender, lower income, and ethnicity, but socio-demographic information explained little variance (9.8%). Hesitancy was associated with lower adherence to social distancing guidelines.

COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy is relatively evenly spread across the population. Willingness to take a vaccine is closely bound to recognition of the collective importance. Vaccine public information that highlights prosocial benefits may be especially effective. Factors such as conspiracy beliefs that foster mistrust and erode social cohesion will lower vaccine up-take.

Freeman et al. (2020a, Psychological Medicine, 21, 1–13) argue that there is widespread support for coronavirus conspiracy theories in England. We hypothesise that their estimates of prevalence are inflated due to a flawed research design. When asking respondents to their survey to agree or disagree with pro-conspiracy statements, they used a biased set of response options: four agree options and only one disagree option (and no ‘don't know’ option). We also hypothesise that due to these flawed measures, the Freeman et al. approach under-estimates the strength of the correlation between conspiracy beliefs and compliance. Finally, we hypothesise that, due to reliance on bivariate correlations, Freeman et al. over-estimate the causal connection between conspiracy beliefs and compliance.

In a pre-registered study, we conduct an experiment embedded in a survey of a representative sample of 2057 adults in England (fieldwork: 16−19 July 2020).

Measured using our advocated ‘best practice’ approach (balanced response options, with a don't know option), prevalence of support for coronavirus conspiracies is only around five-eighths (62.3%) of that indicated by the Freeman et al. approach. We report mixed results on our correlation and causation hypotheses.

To avoid over-estimating prevalence of support for coronavirus conspiracies, we advocate using a balanced rather than imbalanced set of response options, and including a don't know option.

The COVID-19 pandemic in the UK and subsequent lockdown may have affected the mental health of the population. This study examines whether there was an increase in the prevalence and incidence of common mental disorders (CMD) in the UK adult population during the first months of lockdown and whether changes in CMD were associated with stressors related to the pandemic and lockdown.

Longitudinal data from the UK Household Longitudinal Study waves 10–11: 2019–2020 and waves 1–4 of the COVID-19 monthly surveys in April (n = 17 761) to July 2020 (n = 13 754), a representative sample of UK adult population, were analysed. CMD was measured using the 12-item General Health Questionnaire (GHQ-12) (cut-off >2). Changes in CMD were analysed in relation to COVID-19 and social stressors.

Around 29% of adults without CMD less than a year earlier had a CMD in April 2020. However, by July 2020, monthly incidence of CMD had reduced to 9%. Most employment, financial and psychological ‘shocks’ were at their highest levels in April and reduced steadily in later months. Despite the lifting of some lockdown conditions by July, stressors related to loneliness, unemployment, financial problems and domestic work continued to influence CMD.

Some COVID-19 policy responses such as furloughing may have been effective in mitigating the increase in CMD for some groups of employees. Despite some reduction in levels of pandemic and lockdown-related stressors by the middle of 2020, loneliness and financial stressors remained key determinants of incidence in CMD among the UK adult population.