Ontario Adults’ Mental Health and Wellbeing During the First 16 Months of the COVID-19 Pandemic
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study quantitatively assessed adults’ mental health and overall wellbeing over time during the first 16 months of the pandemic in Ontario, Canada. A total of 2,188 participants participated in the study and completed online questionnaires at three time points (baseline—April–July 2020; time 2—July–August 2020; and time 3—July–August 2021), which included demographic questions, the Mental Health Inventory (MHI), and the Personal Wellbeing Index-Adult (PWI-A). One-way repeated-measures ANOVAs revealed a statistically significant increase over time in participants’ mental health (MHI), as well as a significant decrease in their satisfaction with their standard of living, physical health, mental health, personal relationships, safety, community-connectedness, future security, and spirituality/religion (PWI-A). While participants’ mental health improved, their mean scores indicated the presence of mental health disorders. Generally speaking, over the first 16 months of the pandemic, the self-reported mental health of Ontario adults improved, while their perceived wellbeing declined.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".