Emotional consequences of COVID-19 home confinement: The ECLB-COVID19 multicenter study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Public health recommendations and government measures during the COVID-19 pandemic have enforced restrictions on daily living, which may include social distancing, remote work/school, and home confinement. While these measures are imperative to abate the spreading of COVID-19, the impact of these restrictions on mental health and emotional wellbeing is undefined. Therefore, an international online survey was launched on April 6, 2020 in seven languages to elucidate the impact of COVID-19 restrictions on mental health and emotional well-being. This report presents the preliminary results from the first thousand responders on mental wellbeing and mood and feelings questionnaires. Methods The ECLB-COVID19 electronic survey was designed by a steering group of multidisciplinary scientists and academics, following a structured review of the literature. The survey was uploaded and shared on the Google online survey platform. Thirty-five research organizations from Europe, North-Africa, Western Asia and the Americas promoted the multi-languages survey through their networks to general society. Of the 64 questions, 7 were from the Short Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-being Scale (SWEMWBS), and 13 were from the Short Mood and Feelings Questionnaire (SMFQ), which are both validated instruments. Results Analysis was conducted on the first 1047 replies (54% women) from Asia (36%), Africa (40%), Europe (21%) and other (3%). The COVID-19 home confinement had a negative effect on both mental wellbeing and on mood and feelings. Specifically, a significant decrease (p<0.001 and Δ%= 9.4 %) in the total score of mental wellbeing was noted. More individuals (+12.89%) reported a low mental wellbeing “during” compared to “before” home confinement. Furthermore, results from the mood and feelings questionnaire (i.e., depressive symptoms) showed a significant increase by 44.9% (p<0.001) in total score with more people (+10%) developing depressive symptoms “during” compared to “before” home confinement. Conclusion The ECLB-COVID19 survey revealed an increased psychosocial strain triggered by the enforced home confinement. To mitigate this high risk of mental disorders and to foster an Active and Healthy Confinement Lifestyle (AHCL), a crisis-oriented interdisciplinary intervention is urgently needed.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".