Routine regularity during a global pandemic: Impact on mental health outcomes and influence of chronotype
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Among the public health recommendations for supporting mental health during the COVID-19 pandemic, many strategies had an impact on biological rhythms, like sleep hygiene, physical exercise and healthy eating habits. Considering the known relationship between circadian organization and mental health, our aim was to test the association between behavioral regularity and mental health, and its interaction with chronotype, in a large sample surveyed in Brazil. We collected longitudinal data using online questionnaires that assessed sociodemographic characteristics, behavioral routines, mental health (PHQ-9, GAD-7, WHO-5 scales), and chronotype estimation based on midpoint of sleep on free days - MSF (μMCTQ), in a sample of 1390 participants (81% females). We computed a Routine Regularity Score (RRS) that reflects regularity across four behaviors: sleep, eating, working, exercising. There was a strong negative association between RRS and the severity of anxiety and depressive symptoms (GAD-7 and PHQ-9 scores), which was weaker among participants with late MSF, and a strong positive association with well-being (WHO-5 scores). RRS was a mediator of the MSF-mental health association and a predictor of mental health states. This study provides empirical evidence that maintaining behavioral routines during times of hardship may serve as tools to alleviate the negative impact on mental health.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".