MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3047939709 · doi:10.5114/biolsport.2020.96857

Effects of home confinement on mental health and lifestyle behaviours during the COVID-19 outbreak: Insight from the ECLB-COVID19 multicenter study

2020· article· en· W3047939709 on OpenAlexaff
Achraf Ammar, Khaled Trabelsi, Michael Brach, Hamdi Chtourou, Omar Boukhris, Liwa Masmoudi, Bassem Bouaziz, Ellen Bentlage, Daniella How, Mona Ahmed, Patrick J. Mueller, Notger Mueller, Omar Hammouda, Laisa Liane Paineiras-Domingos, Annemarie Braakman‐Jansen, Christian Wrede, Sophia Bastoni, Carlos Soares Pernambuco, Leonardo José Mataruna-Dos-Santos, Morteza Taheri, Khadijeh Irandoust, Aïmen Khacharem, Nicola Luigi Bragazzi, Jana Strahler, Jad Adrian, Albina Andreeva, Jordan M. Glenn, Nicholas T. Bott, Faı̈ez Gargouri, Lotfi Chaâri, Hadj Batatia, Samira khoshnami, Evangelia Samara, Vasiliki Zisi, Parasanth Sankar, Waseem Ahmed, Gamal Mohamed Ali, Osama Abdelkarim, Mohamed Jarraya, Kaïs El Abed, Wassim Moalla, Mohamed Romdhani, Asma Aloui, Nizar Souissi, Julia E.W.C. van Gemert‐Pijnen, Bryan L. Riemann, Laurel Riemann, Jan Delhey, Jonathan Gómez‐Raja, Monique Epstein, Robbert Sanderman, Sebastian Viktor Waldemar Schulz, Achim Jerg, Ramzi Al-Horani, Taiysir Mansi, Mohamed Jmail, Fernando Barbosa, Fernando Ferreira‐Santos, Boštjan Šimunič, Rado Pišot, Saša Pišot, Andrea Gaggioli, Piotr Żmijewski, Stephen J. Bailey, Jürgen M. Steinacker, Karim Chamari, Tarak Driss, Anita Höekelmann

Bibliographic record

VenueBiology of Sport · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicCOVID-19 and Mental Health
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)OutbreakSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)Mental health2019-20 coronavirus outbreakMedicineVirologyInternal medicinePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although recognised as effective measures to curb the spread of the COVID-19 outbreak, social distancing and self-isolation have been suggested to generate a burden throughout the population. To provide scientific data to help identify risk factors for the psychosocial strain during the COVID-19 outbreak, an international cross-disciplinary online survey was circulated in April 2020. This report outlines the mental, emotional and behavioural consequences of COVID-19 home confinement. The ECLB-COVID19 electronic survey was designed by a steering group of multidisciplinary scientists, following a structured review of the literature. The survey was uploaded and shared on the Google online survey platform and was promoted by thirty-five research organizations from Europe, North Africa, Western Asia and the Americas. Questions were presented in a differential format with questions related to responses "before" and "during" the confinement period. 1047 replies (54% women) from Western Asia (36%), North Africa (40%), Europe (21%) and other continents (3%) were analysed. The COVID-19 home confinement evoked a negative effect on mental wellbeing and emotional status (P < 0.001; 0.43 ≤ d ≤ 0.65) with a greater proportion of individuals experiencing psychosocial and emotional disorders (+10% to +16.5%). These psychosocial tolls were associated with unhealthy lifestyle behaviours with a greater proportion of individuals experiencing (i) physical (+15.2%) and social (+71.2%) inactivity, (ii) poor sleep quality (+12.8%), (iii) unhealthy diet behaviours (+10%), and (iv) unemployment (6%). Conversely, participants demonstrated a greater use (+15%) of technology during the confinement period. These findings elucidate the risk of psychosocial strain during the COVID-19 home confinement period and provide a clear remit for the urgent implementation of technology-based intervention to foster an Active and Healthy Confinement Lifestyle AHCL).

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.053

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.042
GPT teacher head0.370
Teacher spread0.328 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations380
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiology of SportSame topicCOVID-19 and Mental HealthFrench-language works237,207