Mental health disparities across sexual orientations during the COVID-19 pandemic: Longitudinal analysis of a UK nationally representative cohort
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: During COVID-19, sexual minority groups may have experienced heightened mental health challenges, amplified by unique stressors and the effects of pandemic-related restrictions. This study investigates the differential impact of the pandemic on mental health across sexual orientations, leveraging population-representative data to explore these disparities. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective cohort design. METHODS: Data from the United Kingdom Household Longitudinal Study (waves 8-12) was used. Monthly COVID-19 incidence rates at the regional level were used to indicate pandemic severity. Mental health outcomes were evaluated using the Mental Component Score of the Short Form-12 (MCS-12) survey. To examine whether COVID-19 led to differential impacts across sexual orientation, fixed-effect longitudinal models were employed, controlling for individual and time-variant covariates. RESULTS: Lesbian women experienced a significant mental health decline during the COVID-19 pandemic, with a 3.10 MCS-12 score decrease (95 % confidence interval (CI): -5.77 to -0.43) and an 11.0 % higher likelihood of depression (95%CI: -0.3 % to 22.3 %, p = 0.057) compared to heterosexual women. Conversely, the impact on the mental health of heterosexual women was negative but not significant (-0.22; 95%CI: -0.47 to -0.04). Bisexual individuals and other women showed non-significant mental health declines. For men, COVID-19's effect on heterosexuals was similarly non-significant (-0.21; 95%CI: -0.48 to 0.1), with no significant differences observed in gay, bisexual, and other men. CONCLUSIONS: Sexual minority individuals, especially lesbian women, faced heightened mental health challenges during COVID-19, emphasizing the urgency for targeted interventions.
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 | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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".