Mental health and self-rated health of older carers during the COVID-19 pandemic: evidence from England
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Older carers play a vital role supporting population health and protecting health and social care systems, yet there has been little research on understanding the effect of the pandemic on this group. In this paper, we investigate caring as a factor contributing to mental and self-rated health. METHODS: We investigate cross-sectional and longitudinal associations between provision of family care and mental health and wellbeing using longitudinal data from 5,149 members of the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing who responded to Wave 9 (2018/2019) and two COVID-19 sub-studies (June/July 2020; November/December 2020). We use logistic or linear regression models depending on outcome measures, controlling for pre-pandemic socioeconomic, demographic, and health-related variables. RESULTS: Before the pandemic, 21% of respondents cared for family or friends. Older people caring for someone inside the household mostly continued to provide care during the pandemic, with more than a quarter reporting an increase in the amount of care provided. Co-resident carers were disproportionately female, older, in the lowest wealth quintile, and more likely to report disability and chronic conditions. Both cross-sectional and longitudinal analyses suggest that, compared to those caring for people living outside the household, co-resident carers were significantly more likely to report poorer mental health and self-rated health. CONCLUSION: The health of older carers worsened disproportionately in the first year of the pandemic, a period also characterised by disruptions to support and closure of respite services. Support for carers' mental and physical health requires greater policy attention, especially in pandemic conditions.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".