MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3152825808 · doi:10.2196/24760

Psychological and Coping Strategies Related to Home Isolation and Social Distancing in Children and Adolescents During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Cross-sectional Study

2021· article· en· W3152825808 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Abduljaleel Abdullatif Zainel, Hamda Qotba, Alyaa Al-Maadeed, Sadriya Al-Kohji, Hanan Al Mujalli, Atif Ali, Lolwa Al Mannai, Aisha Aladab, Hamda AlSaadi, Khalid Al-Karbi, Tholfakhar Al-Baghdadi

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Formative Research · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicCOVID-19 and Mental Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSocial distancePandemicSocial isolationCross-sectional studyAnxietyAngerPublic healthCoping (psychology)MedicineIsolation (microbiology)LonelinessPsychologyCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)PsychiatryEnvironmental healthDiseaseInfectious disease (medical specialty)Nursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: In December 2019, a novel coronavirus called SARS-CoV-2 was identified as the cause of a cluster of pneumonia cases in Wuhan, China. It rapidly spread due to human-to-human transmission, resulting in a global pandemic. Nearly every country, including Qatar, has established guidelines and regulations to limit the spread of the virus and to preserve public health. However, these procedures have been associated with negative effects on the psychological and intellectual well-being of individuals, including children and adolescents. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to determine the psychological influence of home isolation and social distancing on children and adolescents during the COVID-19 pandemic in Qatar, and the strategies used to cope with these measures. METHODS: This cross-sectional study was undertaken using an online questionnaire administered through SMS text messaging. All home-isolated children and adolescents registered at the Primary Health Care Corporation aged 7-18 years were invited to participate in the study. Children and adolescents with intellectual disadvantages were excluded. A P value of .05 (two-tailed) was considered statistically significant. RESULTS: Data were collected from 6608 participants from June 23 to July 18, 2020. Nearly all participants adhered to the official regulations during the period of home isolation and social distancing; however, 69.1% (n=4568) of parents believed their children were vulnerable to the virus compared to 25% (n=1652) who expressed they were not vulnerable at all. Higher levels of anger, depression, and general anxiety were prevalent among 1.3% (n=84), 3.9% (n=260), and 1.6% (n=104) of participants, respectively. The mean score for the emotional constructs anger and depression decreased with increased compliance with regulations (P=.04 and P=.11, respectively). The differences in mean score for all psychological and coping strategies used among participants across the 3 levels of vulnerability to SARS-CoV-2 were statistically significant. The mean score varied little with increasing reported vulnerability to the virus. This mild variation can make a difference when the sample size is large, as is the case in this study. CONCLUSIONS: Screening for psychological and social disruptions is important for the development of strategies by schools and health care providers to assess and monitor behavioral changes and negative psychological impact during post-COVID-19 reintegration. Participants experiencing higher levels of anxiety should be given more attention during reintegration and transitional phases in schools. Although electronic devices and social media platforms may have lowered anxiety levels in some cases, it is important to address how they are used and how content is tailored to children and adolescents. It is also important to maintain an active lifestyle for children and young persons, and encourage them not to neglect their physical health, as this promotes a better psychological state of mind.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.651

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.139
GPT teacher head0.544
Teacher spread0.405 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations25
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Formative ResearchSame topicCOVID-19 and Mental HealthFrench-language works237,207