Abstract
Aim The COVID-19 pandemic and the mitigation measures by governments have upended the economic and social lives of many, leading to widespread psychological distress. However, how distress developed during the pandemic and who was most affected is poorly understood. We explore heterogeneity in trajectories of psychological distress during the first six months of the pandemic in the United Kingdom and relate this heterogeneity to socio-demographic and health factors.
Subjects and Methods We analyze six waves of longitudinal, nationally representative survey data from the UK Household Longitudinal Study (N = 15,218), covering the first lockdown in 2020. First, latent class mixture modelling (LCCM) is used to identify trajectories of psychological distress. Second, associations of the trajectories with covariates are tested with multinomial logistic regressions.
Results We find four different trajectories of distress: continuously low, continuously moderate, temporarily elevated, and continuously elevated distress. One-fifth of the population experienced severely elevated risks of distress. Long-term exposure was highest among younger people, women, those who lost income, and those with previous health conditions or COVID-19 symptoms.
Conclusion Given the threat of persistent stress on health, policy measures should be sensitized to the unintended yet far-reaching consequences of non-pharmaceutical interventions.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
No external funding received.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
The University of Essex Ethics Committee approved all data collection for the Understanding Society main survey and COVID waves, which were performed in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki. All survey participants provided fully informed consent. No additional ethical approval was necessary for this secondary data analysis. We received approval from the database owners to access the data for this study.
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Footnotes
* Data availability statement: The data analyzed in this study are publicly available (University of Essex and Institute for Social and Economic Research, 2020) and a replication package can be found on-line (Ellwardt and Präg, 2021).
The Understanding Society COVID-19 study is funded by the Economic and Social Research Council and the Health Foundation. Fieldwork for the survey is carried out by Ipsos MORI and Kantar. Understanding Society is an initiative funded by the Economic and Social Research Council and various Government Departments, with scientific leadership by the Institute for Social and Economic Research, University of Essex. The research data are distributed by the UK Data Service.
Data Availability
The data analyzed in this study are publicly available (University of Essex and Institute for Social and Economic Research, 2020) and a replication package can be found on-line (Ellwardt and Praeg, 2021).
