Shattered or Strengthened? The Impact of Extended Lockdown on Family Functioning and Quality of Relationships during the COVID-19 Pandemic
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: While much research has focused on mental health and well-being during the early stage of the Covid-19 pandemic, significantly fewer studies have directly explored the connection between lockdown policies, family functioning, and effects on the mental health of parents in highly vulnerable communities in low-income countries where pre-pandemic conditions were already unstable. This study aims to address this gap and examines the quality and nature of relationships with spouses, children, and extended families in highly vulnerable communities during an extended lockdown period. METHODS: With the approval of the appropriate Institutional Review Board and after receiving verbal consent, following standard local procedures, 30 individuals participated in in-depth semi-structured telephone surveys that were conducted three months following the lifting of the lockdown restrictions to assess the impact of the extended quarantine periods on mental health, overall family functioning, and relationships with spouses/partners, children, and extended family. RESULTS: Findings indicate that mental health distress post-lockdown predicts changes in the nature and quality of relationships with spouses, children, and extended family and increased risks for family violence. CONCLUSION: Findings highlight the differential impact of global health crises on highly vulnerable communities facing complex issues with limited access to adequate care systems. By reframing large-scale pandemics as complex emergencies, our results can inform current policies and support interventions and preventive measures preparing families to better cope with similar emergencies.
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 | 0.002 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".