Youth adversity is associated with persistence of depression and anxiety symptoms. This association may be greater for disadvantaged societal groups (such as females) compared with advantaged groups (e.g. males). Given that persistent symptoms are observed across a range of disadvantaged, minoritized, and neurodivergent groups (e.g. low compared with high socio-economic status [SES]), the intersection of individual characteristics may be an important moderator of inequality.

Data from HeadStart Cornwall (N = 4441) was used to assess the effect of youth adversity on combined symptoms of depression and anxiety (Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire emotional problems subscale) measured at three time-points in 11–14-year-olds. Latent trajectories and regressions were estimated for eight intersectionality profiles (based on gender, SES, and hyperactivity/inattention), and moderating effects of the individual characteristics and their intersections were estimated.

Youth adversity was associated with higher average depression/anxiety symptoms at baseline (11–12-years) across all intersectionality profiles. The magnitude of effects differed across profiles, with suggestive evidence for a moderating effect of youth adversity on change over time in depression/anxiety symptoms attributable to the intersection between (i) gender and SES; and (ii) gender, SES, and hyperactivity/inattention.

The detrimental effects of youth adversity pervade across intersectionality profiles. The extent to which these effects are moderated by intersectionality is discussed in terms of operational factors. The current results provide a platform for further research, which is needed to determine the importance of intersectionality as a moderator of youth adversity on the development of depression and anxiety symptoms in adolescence.

A significant rise in mental health disorders was expected during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, referrals to mental health services dropped for several months before rising to pre-pandemic levels.

To identify trajectories of incidence and risk factors for common mental disorders among the general population during 14 months of the COVID-19 pandemic, to inform potential mental health service needs.

A cohort of 33 703 adults in England in the University College London COVID-19 Social Study provided data from March 2020 to May 2021. Growth mixture modelling was used to identify trajectories based on the probability of participants reporting symptoms of depression (Patient Health Questionnaire-9) or anxiety (Generalised Anxiety Disorder-7) in the clinical range, for each month. Sociodemographic and personality-related characteristics associated with each trajectory class were explored.

Five trajectory classes were identified for depression and anxiety. Participants in the largest class (62%) were very unlikely to report clinically significant symptom levels. Other trajectories represented participants with a high likelihood of clinically significant symptoms throughout, early clinically significant symptoms that reduced over time, clinically significant symptoms that emerged as the pandemic unfolded and a moderate likelihood of clinically significant symptoms throughout. Females, younger adults, carers, those with existing mental health diagnoses, those that socialised frequently pre-pandemic and those with higher neuroticism scores were more likely to experience depression or anxiety.

Nearly 40% of participants followed trajectories indicating risk of clinically significant symptoms of depression or anxiety. The identified risk factors could inform public health interventions to target individuals at risk in future health emergencies.

There is a growing global awareness of the psychological consequences of long COVID, supported by emerging empirical evidence. However, the emergence and long-term trajectories of psychological symptoms following the infection are still unclear.

To examine when psychological symptoms first emerge following infection with SARS-CoV-2 and the long-term trajectories of psychological symptoms comparing long- and short-COVID groups.

We analysed longitudinal data from the UCL COVID-19 Social Study (March 2020 to November 2021). We included data from adults living in England who reported contracting SARS-CoV-2 by November 2021 (n = 3115). Of these, 15.9% reported having had long COVID (n = 495). They were matched to participants who had short COVID using propensity score matching on a variety of demographic, socioeconomic and health covariates (n = 962 individuals with 13 325 observations) and data were further analysed using growth curve modelling.

Depressive and anxiety symptoms increased immediately following the onset of infection in both long- and short-COVID groups. But the long-COVID group had substantially greater initial increases in depressive symptoms and heightened levels over 22 months follow-up. Initial increases in anxiety were not significantly different between groups, but only the short-COVID group experienced an improvement in anxiety over follow-up, leading to widening differences between groups.

The findings support work on the psychobiological pathways involved in the development of psychological symptoms relating to long COVID. The results highlight the need for monitoring of mental health and provision of adequate support to be interwoven with diagnosis and treatment of the physical consequences of long COVID.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has brought about significant behavioural changes, one of which is increased time spent at home. This could have important public health implications. This study aimed to explore longitudinal patterns of ‘home confinement’ (defined as not leaving the house/garden) during the COVID-19 pandemic, and the associated predictors and mental health outcomes.

Data were from the UCL COVID-19 Social Study. The analytical sample consisted of 25 390 adults in England who were followed up for 17 months (March 2020–July 2021). Data were analysed using growth mixture models.

Our analyses identified three classes of growth trajectories, including one class showing a high level of persistent home confinement (the home-confined, 24.8%), one changing class with clear alignment with national containment measures (the adaptive, 32.0%), and one class with a persistently low level of confinement (the unconfined, 43.1%). A range of factors were associated with the class membership of home-confinement trajectories, such as age, gender, income, employment status, social relationships and health. The home-confined class had the highest number of depressive (diff = 1.34–1.68, p < 0.001) and anxiety symptoms (diff = 0.84–1.05, p < 0.001) at the end of the follow-up than the other two classes.

There was substantial heterogeneity in longitudinal patterns of home confinement during the COVID-19 pandemic. People with a persistent high level of confinement had the worst mental health outcomes, calling for special attention in mental health action plans, in particular targeted interventions for at-risk groups.

Around one in ten people who contract COVID-19 report persistent symptoms or ‘long COVID’. Impaired mental health and well-being is commonly reported, including anxiety, depression and reduced quality of life. However, there is limited in-depth research exploring why mental health and well-being are affected in people experiencing long COVID.

To explore factors affecting mental health and well-being from the perspective of people with long COVID.

Semi-structured qualitative interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed. Data were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis. Twenty-one people with long COVID participated in the study. Participants were eligible if they self-reported a positive swab test/antibody test or one or more commonly reported COVID-19 symptoms at illness onset. and experiences of one or more long COVID symptoms ≥3 weeks following illness onset.

Five themes were identified across participant accounts regarding factors affecting mental health and well-being, including symptoms causing severe disruption to daily life, lack of service and treatment options, uncertainty of illness trajectories, experiences of care and understanding from others and changes to identity.

People with long COVID experience a range of factors that negatively affect their mental health and well-being. Providing patient-centred health services that integrate rapidly evolving research in this area is important, as are peer support groups and supported approaches to self-management.

In-person religious service attendance has been linked to favorable health and well-being outcomes. However, little research has examined whether online religious participation improves these outcomes, especially when in-person attendance is suspended.

Using longitudinal data of 8951 UK adults, this study prospectively examined the association between frequency of online religious participation during the stringent lockdown in the UK (23 March –13 May 2020) and 21 indicators of psychological well-being, social well-being, pro-social/altruistic behaviors, psychological distress, and health behaviors. All analyses adjusted for baseline socio-demographic characteristics, pre-pandemic in-person religious service attendance, and prior values of the outcome variables whenever data were available. Bonferroni correction was used to correct for multiple testing.

Individuals with online religious participation of ≥1/week (v. those with no participation at all) during the lockdown had a lower prevalence of thoughts of self-harm in week 20 (odds ratio 0.24; 95% CI 0.09–0.62). Online religious participation of <1/week (v. no participation) was associated with higher life satisfaction (standardized β = 0.25; 0.11–0.39) and happiness (standardized β = 0.25; 0.08–0.42). However, there was little evidence for the associations between online religious participation and all other outcomes (e.g. depressive symptoms and anxiety).

There was evidence that online religious participation during the lockdown was associated with some subsequent health and well-being outcomes. Future studies should examine mechanisms underlying the inconsistent results for online v. in-person religious service attendance and also use data from non-pandemic situations.

There are concerns that keyworkers may be at a greater risk for psychological distress than non-keyworkers during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, little research has included keyworkers outside of the healthcare sector or has disaggregated keyworkers into different subgroups.

To examine longitudinal changes in mental health over 12 months during the COVID-19 pandemic comparing four different groups of keyworkers with non-keyworkers.

Longitudinal data were from 21 874 adults living in England (21 March 2020 to 22 February 2021). Latent growth modelling was utilised to compare growth trajectories of depressive and anxiety symptoms in non-keyworkers and four types of keyworkers: (a) health and social care workers, (b) teachers and child care workers, (c) public service workers, and (d) essential services keyworkers (such as food chain or utility workers).

When accounting for both time-invariant and time-varying covariates, keyworkers in the essential services category had consistently higher levels of depressive and anxiety symptoms than non-keyworkers across the whole of the study period. There was little difference in the mental health trajectories between health/social care, teachers/child care and public service worker categories and non-keyworkers.

Our findings suggest that the risk for poorer mental health during the COVID-19 pandemic varies within the broad category of keyworkers generally, and that those working in utility, food chain and transport roles are especially at risk. Future research should focus on identifying which aspects of working conditions may be contributing to occupational stress in these groups.

Little is known about which factors exacerbate and buffer the impact of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)-related adversities on changes in thinking about and engaging in self-harm over time.

To examine how changes in four social factors contribute to changes in self-harm thoughts and behaviours over time and how these factors in turn interact with adversities and worries about adversities to increase risk for these outcomes.

Data from 49 227 UK adults in the UCL COVID-19 Social Study were analysed across the first 59 weeks of the pandemic. Fixed-effects logistic regressions examined time-varying associations between social support quality, loneliness, number of days of face-to-face contact for >15 min and number of days phoning/video calling for ≥15 min with self-harm thoughts and behaviours. We then examined how these four factors in turn interacted with the total number of adversities and worries about adversity and how this affected outcomes.

Increases in the quality of social support were associated with decreases in the likelihood of both outcomes, whereas greater loneliness was associated with an increase in their likelihood. Associations were less clear for telephone/video contact and face-to-face contact with outcomes. Social support buffered and loneliness exacerbated the impact of adversity experiences on self-harm behaviours.

These findings suggest the importance of the quality of one's social support network, rather than the mere presence of contact, for reducing the likelihood of self-harm behaviours in the context of COVID-19 pandemic-related adversity and worry.

There is concern that the COVID-19 pandemic and its aftermath will result in excess suicides by increasing known risk factors such as self-harm, but evidence on how pandemic-related risk factors contribute to changes in these outcomes is lacking.

To examine how different COVID-19-related experiences of and worries about adversity contribute to changes in self-harm thoughts and behaviours.

Data from 49 324 UK adults in the University College London COVID-19 Social Study were analysed (1 April 2020 to 17 May 2021). Fixed-effects regressions explored associations between weekly within-person variation in five categories of adversity experience and adversity worries with changes in self-harm thoughts and behaviours across age groups (18–29, 30–44, 45–59 and 60+ years).

In total, 26.1% and 7.9% of respondents reported self-harm thoughts and behaviours respectively at least once over the study period. The number of adverse experiences was more strongly related to outcomes than the number of worries. The largest specific adversity contributing to increases in both outcomes was having experienced physical or psychological abuse. Financial worries increased the likelihood of both outcomes in most age groups, and having had COVID-19 increased the likelihood of both outcomes in young (18–29 years) and middle-aged (45–59 years) adults.

Findings suggest that a significant portion of UK adults may be at increased risk for self-harm thoughts and behaviours during the pandemic. Given the likelihood that the economic and social consequences of the pandemic will accumulate, policy makers can begin adapting evidence-based suicide prevention strategies and other social policies to help mitigate its consequences.

There is currently major concern about the impact of the global COVID-19 outbreak on mental health. But it remains unclear how individual behaviours could exacerbate or protect against adverse changes in mental health.

To examine the associations between specific activities (or time use) and mental health and well-being among people during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Data were from the UCL COVID-19 Social Study, a panel study collecting data weekly during the COVID-19 pandemic. The analytical sample consisted of 55 204 adults living in the UK who were followed up for the 11-week strict lockdown period from 21 March to 31 May 2020. Data were analysed using fixed-effects and Arellano–Bond models.

Changes in time spent on a range of activities were associated with changes in mental health and well-being. After controlling for bidirectionality, behaviours involving outdoor activities such as gardening and exercising predicted subsequent improvements in mental health and well-being, whereas increased time spent following news about COVID-19 predicted declines in mental health and well-being.

These results are relevant to the formulation of guidance for people obliged to spend extended periods in isolation during health emergencies and may help the public to maintain well-being during future lockdowns and pandemics.

The COVID-19 pandemic and nationally mandated restrictions to control the virus have been associated with increased mental health issues. However, the differential impact of the pandemic and lockdown on groups of individuals, and the personal characteristics associated with poorer outcomes are unknown.

Data from 21 938 adults in England who participated in a stratified cohort study were analysed. Trajectories of depression and anxiety symptoms were identified using growth mixture modelling. Multinomial and logistic regression models were constructed to identify sociodemographic and personality-related risk factors associated with trajectory class membership.

Four trajectories of depression and five for anxiety were identified. The most common group presented with low symptom severity throughout, other classes were identified that showed: severe levels of symptoms which increased; moderate symptoms throughout; worsening mental health during lockdown but improvements after lockdown ended; and for anxiety only, severe initial anxiety that decreased quickly during lockdown. Age, gender, ethnicity, income, previous diagnoses, living situation, personality factors and sociability were associated with different trajectories.

Nearly 30% of participants experienced trajectories with symptoms in the clinical range during lockdown, and did not follow the average curve or majority group, highlighting the importance of differential trajectories. Young, female, outgoing and sociable people and essential workers experienced severe anxiety around the announcement of lockdown which rapidly decreased. Younger individuals with lower incomes and previous mental health diagnoses experienced higher and increasing levels of symptoms. Recognising the likely symptom trajectories for such groups may allow for targeted care or interventions.

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.

There is increasing cross-disciplinary research on the relationship between individuals’ social, cultural and community engagement (SCCE) and mental health. SCCE includes engagement in the arts, culture and heritage, libraries and literature, sports and nature activities, volunteering, and community groups. Research has demonstrated the effects of these activities both on the prevention and management of mental illness. However, it remains unclear whether current research is focusing on the research questions that are of most immediate urgency and relevance to policy and practice.

The current project was funded as part of the UK Research and Innovation cross-disciplinary mental health network programme to develop and co-produce a new cross-disciplinary research agenda on SCCE and mental health.

Established processes and principles for developing health research agendas were followed, with a six-phase design including engagement with over 1000 key stakeholders, consultations, integration of findings and collective prioritisation of key questions.

We identified four core themes: the mode of engagement, process of engagement, impact of engagement and infrastructure required to facilitate engagement. There were many points of agreement across all stakeholder groups on the priority questions within these themes, but also some specific questions of relevance to different sectors.

This agenda is particularly timely given the extreme pressure on mental health services predicted to follow the current COVID-19 pandemic. It is important to identify how resources from other sectors can be mobilised, and what research questions are going to be most important to fund to support SCCE for mental health.

There is a recognised need for the identification of factors that might be protective against the development of depression in older adults. Over the past decade, there has been growing research demonstrating the effects of cultural engagement (which combines a number of protective factors including social interaction, cognitive stimulation and gentle physical activity) on the treatment of depression, but as yet not on its prevention.

To explore whether cultural engagement in older adults is associated with a reduced risk of developing depression over the following decade.

Working with data from 2148 adults in the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing who were free from depression at baseline, we used logistic regression models to explore associations between frequency of cultural engagement (including going to museums, theatre and cinema) and the risk of developing depression over the following 10 years using a combined index of the Centre for Epidemiological Studies Depression Scale (CES-D) and physician-diagnosed depression.

There was a dose–response relationship between frequency of cultural engagement and the risk of developing depression independent of sociodemographic, health-related and social confounders. This equated to a 32% lower risk of developing depression for people who attended every few months (odds ratio (OR) = 0.68, 95% CI 0.47–0.99, P = 0.046) and a 48% lower risk for people who attended once a month or more (OR = 0.52, 95% CI 0.34–0.80, P = 0.003). Results were robust to sensitivity analyses exploring reverse causality, subclinical depressive symptoms and alternative CES-D thresholds.

Cultural engagement appears to be an independent risk-reducing factor for the development of depression in older age.

None.

None.