FAMILY BONDING IN CONFINEMENT OF THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Due to the demands of the COVID-19 pandemic, the family became the primary setting in which people were confined. As a result, the family bond during confinement is an important phenomenon to study. Purpose: The purpose of this systematic review was to determine if the family bond would influence the changes in mental health brought on by confinement and the COVID-19 pandemic. Methodology: The methodological were a Systematic Review using the PRISMA model in the search engines Web of Science, Scopus, PubMed, PSYINFO, Taylor and Francis, Sciendo, Academic Search Ultimate, and Medline between September 2021 and April 2022. NOS (Newcastle-Ottawa Scale) was utilized. Results: Concerning the search results, it was possible to identify seven relevant studies for analysis: four on the variables associated with psychological well-being during the pandemic and two on the perceived changes in emotional state during the pandemic. Conclusions: the effects of confinement on mental health are characterized by an increase in negative emotions, heightened perceptions of stress, anxiety, and depression, and altered sleep patterns. Concerning the influence of the family bond on mental health, it was discovered that when the bond is perceived as positive and strong, that is, the individual perceives that their basic, social, and affective needs are covered, it becomes a protective factor for mental health, regulating the manifestation of stress, favoring the manifestation of positive emotions over negative ones, and becoming emotionally supportive.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.032 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".