RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Understanding Inequalities in Mental Health by Family Structure during COVID-19 Lockdowns: Evidence from the UK Household Longitudinal Study
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2022.10.27.22281616
DO 10.1101/2022.10.27.22281616
A1 Green, Michael J
A1 Craig, Peter
A1 Demou, Evangelia
A1 Katikireddi, S Vittal
A1 Leyland, Alastair H
A1 Pearce, Anna
YR 2022
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/10/30/2022.10.27.22281616.abstract
AB Background 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.Conclusions 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.Key MessagesCouples with young children compared to those without, had raised risk of psychiatric distress during UK lockdowns. Effect decompositions suggested this was largely due to a combination of differential exposure and vulnerability to childcare and home-schooling.Among those without young children, being single compared to in a couple was associated with raised risk of psychiatric distress during UK lockdowns, with differential exposure to financial strain and loneliness both contributing to this inequality.There was not sufficient evidence to indicate that being single with young children increased risk of psychiatric distress relative to couples with young children or singles without.Competing Interest StatementSVK was a member of the UK Scientific Advisory Group on Emergencies (SAGE) subgroup on ethnicity and co-chair of the Scottish Government Expert Reference Group on Ethnicity and COVID-19.Funding StatementThis study was funded by the Medical Research Council [MC_UU_00022/2] and the Scottish Government Chief Scientist Office [SPHSU17]. SVK was additionally supported by a NRS Senior Clinical Fellowship [SCAF/15/02], and AP was additionally supported by a Wellcome Trust University Award [205412/Z/16/Z].Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:Understanding Society data are available through the UK data service: Main surveys: https://beta.ukdataservice.ac.uk/datacatalogue/studies/study?id=6614 COVID surveys: https://beta.ukdataservice.ac.uk/datacatalogue/studies/study?id=8644I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.YesI 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).YesI 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.YesUnderstanding Society data are available through the UK data service: Main surveys: https://beta.ukdataservice.ac.uk/datacatalogue/studies/study?id=6614 COVID surveys: https://beta.ukdataservice.ac.uk/datacatalogue/studies/study?id=8644