COVID-19 Psychological Research Consortium Research Articles

Gender differences in intimate partner violence: Risk factors and associations with suicide.

This study sought to provide updated estimates of the occurrence of intimate partner violence (IPV) in the general adult population of Ireland and to better understand gender-specific profiles of IPV, their risk factors, and their relationship with suicidality. Data (N = 1,098) from Wave 4 of the Irish arm of the COVID-19 Psychological Research Consortium (C19PRC) study were used. 32.1% of the sample experienced lifetime IPV, with IPV more common among females. Latent class analysis results showed that females had a more complex profile of IPV (four classes) than males (three classes). Risk factors for females included younger age, having children, lower income level, lower social support, and lower social contact, while risk factors for males were living in an urban environment, having children, and lower social support. All IPV exposure was found to be associated with a significantly higher likelihood of experiencing multiple suicide-related phenomena for males and females. IPV is a major public social health issue affecting approximately one-in-three females and one-in-four males in Ireland and is strongly associated with suicide-related phenomena. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

Testing the latent structure of ICD-11 prolonged grief disorder symptoms in the U.K. adult population: An exploratory structural equation modeling approach.

The latent structure of ICD-11 prolonged grief disorder (PGD), as measured using the International Prolonged Grief Disorder Scale (IPGDS), was assessed in a large general population sample of bereaved adults from the United Kingdom. Data were derived from Wave 5 of the COVID-19 Psychological Research Consortium Study (C19PRC-UK). Exploratory structural equation modeling (ESEM) was used to assess the latent structure of the IPGDS. Identified factors were explored in relation to known correlates (i.e., gender, age of the bereaved, income, bereavement timeframe, age of the deceased) and functional impairment. Three factors-Loss, Emotional Numbing, and Emotional Reactivity-emerged in the best-fitting ESEM model, χ2 (92, N = 1,763) = 273.70, p < .001, CFI = .97, TLI = .96, RMSEA = .048, SRMR = .020. All factors were significantly associated with bereavement timeframe, βs = -.15--.20, and age of the deceased, βs = -.22--.31. Lower income predicted both Loss and Emotional Numbing; younger age of the bereaved predicted both Loss and Emotional Reactivity; and female gender was a unique predictor of Loss. Functional impairment was associated only with Emotional Numbing, β = .89. The findings highlight the multidimensional structure of PGD. However, the patterns of factor/cross-factor loadings observed in the present study indicate that a "simple" structure was not attainable. Associations between factors and covariates attest to the discriminant validity of the factors, and the association between Emotional Numbing and functional impairment may afford clinicians an opportunity to better understand and target the most disruptive features of grief.

Predicting resilience during the COVID-19 Pandemic in the United Kingdom: Cross-sectional and longitudinal results.

Although the COVID-19 pandemic has impacted the psychological wellbeing of some people, there is evidence that many have been much less affected. The Ecological Model of Resilience (EMR) may explain why some individuals are not resilient whilst others are. In this study we test the EMR in a comparison of UK survey data collected from the COVID-19 Psychological Research Consortium (C19PRC) longitudinal study of a representative sample of the United Kingdom (UK) adult population and data from an Italian arm of the study. We first compare data from the third wave of the UK arm of the study, collected in July/August 2020, with data from an equivalent sample and stage of the pandemic in Italy in July 2020. Next, using UK longitudinal data collected from C19PRC Waves 1, 3 and 5, collected between March 2020 and April 2021 we identify the proportion of people who were resilient. Finally, we examine which factors, drawn from the EMR, predict resilient and non-resilient outcomes. We find that the 72% of the UK sample was resilient, in line with the Italian study. In the cross-sectional logistic regression model, age and self-esteem were significantly associated with resilience whilst death anxiety thoughts, neuroticism, loneliness, and Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) symptoms related to COVID-19 were significantly associated with Non-Resilient outcomes. In the longitudinal UK analysis, at Wave 5, 80% of the sample was Resilient. Service use, belonging to wider neighbourhood, self-rated health, self-esteem, openness, and externally generated death anxiety were associated with Resilient outcomes. In contrast, PTSD symptoms and loneliness were associated with Non-Resilient outcomes. The EMR effectively explained the results. There were some variables which are amenable to intervention which could increase resilience in the face of similar future challenges.

Development and initial validation of a short form of the Memories of Home and Family Scale

BackgroundThe Memories of Home and Family Scale (MHFS; Shevlin et al., 2022) was developed as a multidimensional measure of subjective memories of experiences at home and with family during childhood. Due to the length of the scale, a short version of the MHFS (MHFS-SF) has been developed. Data were from Wave 7 of the COVID-19 Psychological Research Consortium Study (C19PRC-UK), a population based UK survey (N = 1405). Two items with the highest factor loadings from each of the six dimensions of the original MHFS were selected for inclusion. Confirmatory factor analytic (CFA) models were estimated to test the dimensionality of the scale. Convergent and discriminant validity were tested by examining associations with criterion variables. CFA results supported the multidimensionality of the scale. MHFS-SF total and sub-scale scores were negatively correlated with measures of depression, anxiety, loneliness, and paranoia, and were positively correlated with wellbeing. Regression analyses revealed that MHFS-SF total and sub-scale scores significantly predicted loneliness, paranoia, and wellbeing, even after accounting for age, gender, and current internalising symptoms. Results from this study suggest that the MHFS-SF scores retain the excellent psychometric properties of the original scale while improving efficiency. The MHFS-SF demonstrated high levels of convergent and discriminant validity with mental health and wellbeing measures. Future research should seek to validate the MHFS-SF in different populations and assess its usefulness in clinical settings.

Symptoms and levels of ICD-11 Prolonged Grief Disorder in a representative community sample of UK adults.

Prolonged Grief Disorder (PGD) is a new disorder included in ICD-11 (WHO, 2018). There is a growing body of literature surrounding the prevalence and correlates of ICD-11 PGD symptoms as assessed using various measures. This study was the first to assess levels of ICD-11 PGD symptoms as measured by the International Prolonged Grief Disorder Scale (IPGDS), a self-report scale directly aligned with the ICD-11 definition of PGD, among the United Kingdom adult general population, and identify correlates. Participants included 2025 adults who participated in Wave 5 of the COVID-19 Psychological Research Consortium Study (C19PRC-UK). Prevalence rates of PGD were estimated based on two commonly used algorithms defined as 'strict' and 'moderate'. Sociodemographic, loss-related, and mental health correlates (i.e., anxiety, depression, mental health treatment seeking, loneliness) of strict and moderate PGD were then examined using multinomial logistic regressions. It was found that 2.4% (n = 43) of participants met probable caseness for PGD using the strict criteria while 7.9% (n = 140) met probable caseness for PGD using the moderate criteria. Multinomial logistic regression analysis results showed, as predicted, that income, time since bereavement, death of a child, religiosity, and depression were associated with both moderate and strict PGD. Correlates of moderate PGD included country of residence, urbanicity, younger age of bereaved, and loneliness. This study highlights that some symptoms of PGD are commonly reported in the general population, although relatively few meet the criteria for clinical significance. The routine assessment for PGD following a bereavement is discussed and the development of appropriate interventions are recommended.

Perceived manageability of debt and mental health during the COVID-19 pandemic: A UK population analysis

ObjectivesThis study examined the association between perceived manageability of debt and risk of depression, anxiety, and mental health help-seeking among a nationally representative sample of adults living in the United Kingdom (UK).MethodsData was derived from the COVID-19 Psychological Research Consortium (C19PRC) Study Wave 6 (August/September 2021) which examined the psychological, social, and economic effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on the UK adult population. Bivariate and logistic regression analyses were conducted to determine the association between different levels of perceived debt manageability (i.e., “easily manageable”, “some problems”, “quite serious problems”, “very serious problems”, “cannot manage at all”) and mental health related outcomes.ResultsAlmost a quarter of the sample (24%, n = 494) reported debt management problems, and debt manageability associated with higher levels of anxiety, depression, and mental health help-seeking. After adjusting for demographic variables (e.g. income, receipt of benefits), logistic regression analysis demonstrated a dose-response association between increasing levels of debt manageability problems and mental health outcomes. Specifically, adjusted odds ratios for anxiety ranged from 2.28 (‘some problems’) to 11.18 (‘very serious problems’), for depression ranged from 2.80 (‘some problems’) to 16.21 (‘cannot manage at all’), and for mental health help-seeking ranged from 1.69 (‘some problems’) to 3.18 (‘quite serious problems’, ‘very serious problems’).ConclusionThis study highlights that debt manageability problems represent a robust predictor of depression, anxiety, and mental-health help seeking.

Tracking the psychological and socio-economic impact of the COVID-19 pandemic in the UK: A methodological report from Wave 5 of the COVID-19 Psychological Research Consortium (C19PRC) Study.

ObjectivesThe COVID‐19 Psychological Research Consortium (C19PRC) Study was established in March 2020 to monitor the psychological and socio‐economic impact of the pandemic in the UK and other countries. This paper describes the protocol for Wave 5 (March–April 2021).MethodsThe survey assessed: COVID‐19 related experiences; experiences of common mental health disorders; psychological characteristics; and social and political attitudes. Adults who participated in any previous wave (N = 4949) were re‐invited to participate. Weights were calculated using a survey raking algorithm to ensure the longitudinal panel was nationally representative in terms of gender, age, and household income, amongst other factors.ResultsOverall, 2520 adults participated. A total of 2377 adults who participated in the previous survey wave (November–December 2020) were re‐interviewed at Wave 5 (61.5% retention rate). Attrition between these two waves was predicted by younger age, lower household income, children living in the household, and treatment for mental health difficulties. Of the adults recruited into the C19PRC study at baseline, 57.4% (N = 1162) participated in Wave 5. The raking procedure re‐balanced the longitudinal panel to within 1.5% of population estimates for selected socio‐demographic characteristics.ConclusionThis paper outlines the growing strength of the publicly available C19PRC Study data for COVID‐19‐related interdisciplinary research.

A network approach to understanding social distancing behaviour during the first UK lockdown of the COVID-19 pandemic

Objective Given the highly infectious nature of COVID-19, social distancing practices are key in stemming the spread of the virus. We aimed to assess the complex interplay among psychological factors, socio-demographic characteristics and social distancing behaviours within the framework of the widely used Capability, Opportunity, Motivation-Behaviour (COM-B) model. Design The present research employed network psychometrics on data collected during the first UK lockdown in April 2020 as part of the COVID-19 Psychological Research Consortium (C19PRC) Study. Using a network approach, we examined the predictions of psychological and demographic variables onto social distancing practices at two levels of analysis: macro and micro. Results Our findings revealed several factors that influenced social distancing behaviour during the first UK lockdown. The COM-B model was successful in predicting particular aspects of social-distancing via the influence of psychological capability and motivation at the macro-and micro-levels, respectively. Notably, demographic variables, such as education, income, and age, were directly and uniquely predictive of certain social distancing behaviours. Conclusion Our findings reveal psychological factors that are key predictors of social distancing behaviour and also illustrate how demographic variables directly influence such behaviour. Our research has implications for the design of empirically-driven interventions to promote adherence to social distancing practices in this and future pandemics. Supplemental data for this article is available online at

Testing alternative models and predictive utility of the Death Anxiety Inventory-Revised: A COVID-19 related longitudinal population based study

The beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic had a profound effect on all aspects of daily life and triggered a swell of anxiety across the world. Some suggest this emotional response to the pandemic can be explained through death anxiety (DA), a transdiagnostic dimension associated with numerous psychological disorders. However, it remains unclear as to whether DA is a unidimensional or multidimensional construct. The primary aim of this study was to examine the underlying structure of the Death Anxiety Inventory-Revised (DAI-R; Tomás-Sábado et al., 2005) and assess its associations with mental health and demographic variables during the COVID-19 pandemic. To achieve these aims, we utilized data from Waves 1 (N = 2205: collected between March 23 and March 28, 2020) and 2 (N = 1406: collected between April 22 and May 1, 2020) of the COVID-19 Psychological Research Consortium (C19PRC), a multi-wave nationally representative study. Results showed that a 4-factor model provided the best fit to the data compared to a unidimensional and 4-factor second-order model. Further analyses showed that DA at Wave 1 was positively associated with somatic symptoms, paranoia, depression, anxiety, and traumatic stress symptoms at Wave 2, supporting previous research that suggests that the fear of death is predictive of psychopathology. Significantly, the factor labelled ‘Thoughts about Death’ at Wave 1 was the strongest predictor of the five main psychological variables at Wave 2, after statistically controlling for the other latent variables. These findings highlight the transdiagnostic nature of DA and support this important diagnostic construct becoming a measure of mental health more generally within the population. It is hoped that this research will shine a light on those suffering from DA and become a catalyst for increased therapeutic intervention, funding, and research in this area.

Sharing data to better understand one of the world's most significant shared experiences: data resource profile of the longitudinal COVID-19 psychological research consortium (C19PRC) study.

This paper serves to alert IJPDS readers to the availability of a major new longitudinal survey data resource, the COVID-19 Psychological Research Consortium (C19PRC) Study, which is being released for secondary use via the Open Science Framework. The C19PRC Study is a rich and detailed dataset that provides a convenient and valuable foundation from which to study the social, political, and health status of European adults during an unprecedented time of change as a direct result of the COVID-19 pandemic and Brexit. Here, we provide an overview of the C19PRC Study design, with the purpose of stimulating interest about the study among social scientists and maximising use of this resource.

Attitudes Towards Mental Health Services During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Findings from a Nationally Representative Sample of Irish Adults.

This study sought to determine the public’s attitudes towards mental health services during the COVID-19 pandemic and examine the sociodemographic and psychological factors associated with these attitudes to gain an understanding of the best course of action to increase favourable attitudes. Data from the Republic of Ireland arm of the COVID-19 Psychological Research Consortium (C19PRC) study was used to fulfil the objectives of this study. Participants were asked to indicate their level of agreement with statements regarding mental health services and the COVID-19 pandemic. Levels of agreement were then scored, and the relationships between attitude scores and sociodemographic and psychological factors were evaluated utilizing hierarchical multiple regression analysis. Sociodemographic factors associated with positive attitudes towards mental health were older age, experience with mental health treatment, and experience with internalizing distress. These factors should be considered when developing strategies to increase favourable public attitudes towards mental health services in Ireland.

Modelling the complexity of pandemic-related lifestyle quality change and mental health: an analysis of a nationally representative UK general population sample

PurposeThe COVID-19 pandemic has affected the way many individuals go about their daily lives. This study attempted to model the complexity of change in lifestyle quality as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic and its context within the UK adult population.MethodsData from the COVID-19 Psychological Research Consortium Study (Wave 3, July 2020; N = 1166) were utilised. A measure of COVID-19-related lifestyle change captured how individuals’ lifestyle quality had been altered as a consequence of the pandemic. Exploratory factor analysis and latent profile analysis were used to identify distinct lifestyle quality change subgroups, while multinomial logistic regression analysis was employed to describe class membership.ResultsFive lifestyle dimensions, reflecting partner relationships, health, family and friend relations, personal and social activities, and work life, were identified by the EFA, and seven classes characterised by distinct patterns of change across these dimensions emerged from the LPA: (1) better overall (3.3%), (2) worse except partner relations (6.0%), (3) worse overall (2.5%), (4) better relationships (9.5%), (5) better except partner relations (4.3%), (6) no different (67.9%), and (7) worse partner relations only (6.5%). Predictor variables differentiated membership of classes. Notably, classes 3 and 7 were associated with poorer mental health (COVID-19 related PTSD and suicidal ideation).ConclusionsFour months into the pandemic, most individuals’ lifestyle quality remained largely unaffected by the crisis. Concerningly however, a substantial minority (15%) experienced worsened lifestyles compared to before the pandemic. In particular, a pronounced deterioration in partner relations seemed to constitute the more severe pandemic-related lifestyle change.

Design, content, and fieldwork procedures of the COVID-19Psychological Research Consortium (C19PRC) Study - Wave 4.

ObjectivesThis paper outlines fieldwork procedures for Wave 4 of the COVID‐19 Psychological Research Consortium (C19PRC) Study in the UK during November–December 2020.MethodsRespondents provided data on socio‐political attitudes, beliefs, and behaviours, and mental health disorders (anxiety, depression, and posttraumatic stress). In Phase 1, adults (N = 2878) were reinvited to participate. At Phase 2, new recruitment: (i) replenished the longitudinal strand to account for attrition; and (ii) oversampled from the devolved UK nations to facilitate robust between‐country analyses for core study outcomes. Weights were calculated using a survey raking algorithm to ensure the longitudinal panel was representative of the baseline sample characteristics.ResultsIn Phase 1, 1796 adults were successfully recontacted and provided full interviews at Wave 4 (62.4% retention rate). In Phase 2, 292 new respondents were recruited to replenish the panel, as well as 1779 adults from Wales, Scotland, and Northern Ireland, who were representative of the socio‐political composition of the adult populations in these nations. The raking procedure successfully re‐balanced the longitudinal panel to within 1% of population estimates for selected socio‐demographic characteristics.ConclusionThe C19PRC Study offers a unique opportunity to facilitate and stimulate interdisciplinary research addressing important public health questions relating to the COVID‐19 pandemic.

Psychological responses to the COVID-19 pandemic are heterogeneous but have stabilised over time: 1 year longitudinal follow-up of the COVID-19 Psychological Research Consortium (C19PRC) study.

Psychological responses to the COVID-19 pandemic are heterogeneous but have stabilised over time: 1 year longitudinal follow-up of the COVID-19 Psychological Research Consortium (C19PRC) study.

Tracking the Irish adult population during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic: A methodological report of the COVID-19 psychological research consortium (C19PRC) study in Ireland

The COVID-19 Psychological Research Consortium (C19PRC) study was established to determine the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the population of multiple countries. Here, we provide a methodological overview, cohort profile, data access, and summary of key findings from the Republic of Ireland arm of the C19PRC study. A longitudinal internet panel survey was designed to collect data from a nationally representative sample of Irish adults (N = 1041) who were tracked from March/April 2020 to March/April 2021. Quota sampling methods were used to produce a sample that was representative of the population with respect to sex, age, and regional distribution. Data were collected in five waves, and new participants were recruited at follow-up waves to cover sample attrition and produce nationally representative samples at various points during the first year of the pandemic. A comprehensive battery of measures was used throughout the project to assess an array of sociodemographic, political, social, psychological, physical health, COVID-19, and mental health variables. Analyses were conducted to compare sample characteristic to known population parameters from available census data. These analyses showed that the sample was representative of the general adult population of Ireland on the three quota variables and was reasonable representative of the population across a diverse range of sociodemographic variables. These data representative the first and only nationally representative, longitudinal survey of the mental health of the Irish population. These data are made freely available to interested users (https://osf.io/2huzd/files/) and the findings of this study provide a methodological basis for the future use of these data.

Context, design and conduct of the longitudinal COVID-19 psychological research consortium study-wave 3.

ObjectivesThe COVID‐19 Psychological Research Consortium (C19PRC) Study aims to assess the impact of the COVID‐19 pandemic in the adult population in multiple countries. This paper describes the third wave of the UK survey (the ‘parent’ strand of the Consortium) during July‐August 2020.MethodsAdults (N = 2025) who participated in the baseline and/or first follow‐up surveys were reinvited to participate in this survey, which assessed: (1) COVID‐19 related knowledge, attitudes, and behaviours; (2) the occurrence of common mental disorders; as well as the role of (3) psychological factors and (4) social and political attitudes, in influencing the public’s response to the pandemic. Weights were calculated using a survey raking algorithm to ensure that the cross‐sectional sample is nationally representative in terms of gender, age, and household income, and representative of the baseline sample characteristics for household composition, ethnicity, urbanicity and born/raised in UK.Results1166 adults (57.6% of baseline participants) provided full interviews at Wave 3. The raking procedure successfully re‐balanced the cross‐sectional sample to within 1% of population estimates across selected socio‐demographic characteristics.ConclusionThis paper demonstrates the strength of the C19PRC Study data to facilitate and stimulate interdisciplinary research addressing important public health questions relating to the COVID‐19 pandemic.

Refuting the myth of a 'tsunami' of mental ill-health in populations affected by COVID-19: evidence that response to the pandemic is heterogeneous, not homogeneous.

The current study argues that population prevalence estimates for mental health disorders, or changes in mean scores over time, may not adequately reflect the heterogeneity in mental health response to the COVID-19 pandemic within the population. The COVID-19 Psychological Research Consortium (C19PRC) Study is a longitudinal, nationally representative, online survey of UK adults. The current study analysed data from its first three waves of data collection: Wave 1 (March 2020, N = 2025), Wave 2 (April 2020, N = 1406) and Wave 3 (July 2020, N = 1166). Anxiety-depression was measured using the Patient Health Questionnaire Anxiety and Depression Scale (a composite measure of the PHQ-9 and GAD-7) and COVID-19-related posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) with the International Trauma Questionnaire. Changes in mental health outcomes were modelled across the three waves. Latent class growth analysis was used to identify subgroups of individuals with different trajectories of change in anxiety-depression and COVID-19 PTSD. Latent class membership was regressed on baseline characteristics. Overall prevalence of anxiety-depression remained stable, while COVID-19 PTSD reduced between Waves 2 and 3. Heterogeneity in mental health response was found, and hypothesised classes reflecting (i) stability, (ii) improvement and (iii) deterioration in mental health were identified. Psychological factors were most likely to differentiate the improving, deteriorating and high-stable classes from the low-stable mental health trajectories. A low-stable profile characterised by little-to-no psychological distress ('resilient' class) was the most common trajectory for both anxiety-depression and COVID-19 PTSD. Monitoring these trajectories is necessary moving forward, in particular for the ~30% of individuals with increasing anxiety-depression levels.

Modelling Changes in Anxiety-Depression and Traumatic Stress During the First Wave of the COVID-19 Pandemic in the UK: Evidence for Population Heterogeneity in Longitudinal Change

Background: Research is needed to examine change in general population mental health since the beginning of the pandemic, while accounting for heterogeneity in mental health response.Methods: The COVID-19 Psychological Research Consortium (C19PRC) Study is a longitudinal, nationally representative, internet-based survey of UK adults. The current study analysed data from its first three waves of data collection: Wave 1 (March 2020, N =2025), Wave 2 (April 2020, N =1406) and Wave 3 (July 2020, N =1166). Anxiety-depression was measured using the Patient Health Questionnaire Anxiety and Depression Scale (a composite measure of the PHQ-9 and GAD-7) and COVID-19 related PTSD with the International Trauma Questionnaire. Changes in mental health outcomes were modelled across the three waves. Latent class growth analysis was used to identify subgroups of individuals with different trajectories of change in anxiety-depression and COVID-19 PTSD. Latent class membership was regressed on baseline characteristics.Outcomes: Overall prevalence of anxiety-depression remained stable, while COVID-19 PTSD reduced between Waves 2 and 3. Heterogeneity in mental health response was found, and hypothesised classes reflecting (i) stability, (ii) improvement, and (iii) deterioration in mental health were identified. Psychological factors were most likely to differentiate the improving, deteriorating and high-stable classes from the low-stable mental health trajectories.Interpretation: A low-stable profile characterised by little-to-no psychological distress (‘resilient’ class) was the most common trajectory for both anxiety-depression and COVID-19 PTSD. Monitoring of these trajectories is necessary moving forward, in particular for the ~30% of individuals with increasing levels of anxiety-depression.Funding Statement: Economic and Social Research Council (ES/V004379/1).Declaration of Interests: We declare that no competing interests exist.Ethics Approval Statement: Ethical approval was granted by the University of Sheffield (Ref. 033759). All participants provided informed consent.

The Italian COVID-19 Psychological Research Consortium (IT C19PRC): General Overview and Replication of the UK Study.

The COVID-19 pandemic represents a major stressor for the psychological health of people worldwide. In the UK, the COVID19-Psychological Research Consortium Study (C19PRC) launched to evaluate the psychological impact of COVID-19 in the general population and its implications. The project was then extended to Italy and several other countries. This article provides an overview of the Italian C19PRC study and its replication of two specific findings from the UK C19PRC. In the first part, the relationship between anxiety and somatic symptomatology is examined. In the second part, we analyze the association between several factors and psychological health outcomes: depression/anxiety, traumatic stress, COVID-19 anxiety. In line with the study conducted in the UK, an online survey was administered to the adult Italian general population. The sample included 1038 respondents (age, mean = 49.94, SD = 16.14, 51.15% females) taken from four regions: Lombardia, Veneto, Lazio, and Campania. The relationship between predictors and outcomes was evaluated by means of logistic regression models. Somatic indices showed a positive association with anxiety, worse somatic symptoms were associated with mourning a loss of a beloved one due to COVID-19 and with precarious health conditions. Females showed a higher incidence of psychological issues. No differences in anxiety, depression, and traumatic stress were found across regions but the Campania region showed the most severe somatic symptomatology. In the second analysis, the factors associated with more severe psychological outcomes (i.e., anxiety and/or depression, traumatic stress, and COVID-19 related anxiety) were younger age, the presence of minors in the household, traumatic stressors, and precarious health conditions. No differences across regions emerged. The Italian results correspond to the UK findings for anxiety, depression, and traumatic stress. Both in the UK and Italy, the factors associated with worse psychological health were gender (female), younger age, having children, pre-existing health issues (both for oneself or someone close), and the moderate/high perceived risk of contracting COVID-19 within one month. In Italy, unlike the UK, lower household income and having (had) COVID-19 were not associated with poorer mental health. The psychological impact of COVID-19 can last for months; future research should explore all aspects of the psychological burden of COVID-19 in order to implement psychological interventions and promote psychological health.

Monitoring the psychological, social, and economic impact of the COVID-19 pandemic in the population: Context, design and conduct of the longitudinal COVID-19 psychological research consortium (C19PRC) study.

ABSTRACTObjectivesThe C19PRC study aims to assess the impact of the COVID‐19 pandemic in the adult population of the UK, Republic of Ireland, and Spain. This paper describes the conduct of the first two waves of the UK survey (the “parent” strand of the Consortium) during March–April 2020.MethodsA longitudinal, internet panel survey was designed to assess: (1) COVID‐19 related knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors; (2) the occurrence of common mental health disorders as well as the role of (3) psychological factors and (4) social and political attitudes, in influencing the public's response to the pandemic. Quota sampling (age, sex, and household income) was used to recruit a nationally representative sample of adults.ResultsTwo thousand and twenty five adults were recruited at baseline, and 1406 were followed‐up one‐month later (69.4% retention rate). The baseline sample was representative of the UK population in relation to economic activity, ethnicity, and household composition. Attrition was predicted by key socio‐demographic characteristics, and an inverse probability weighting procedure was employed to ensure the follow‐up sample was representative of the baseline sample.ConclusionThe C19PRC study data has strong generalizability to facilitate and stimulate interdisciplinary research on important public health questions relating to the COVID‐19 pandemic.