Family vulnerability, disruption, and parent mental health problems during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study evaluated two pathways that may help explain changes in parent mental health during the early months of the COVID-19 pandemic. One pathway, the preexisting vulnerability pathway, considered whether family relationship quality prior to the COVID-19 pandemic predicted parent mental health during the pandemic. The second, the family disruption pathway, considered deterioration in family relationship quality as predictive of declines in parent mental health during the pandemic. We measured family relationship quality in terms of family cohesion, conflict, and routines and predicted parent anxiety, depression, and hostility. All models included financial strain and child externalizing behavior as covariates. The sample included 204 parents who completed one survey prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, a second survey after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic in May 2020, and a third survey 2 weeks after the initial survey was sent. Analyses utilized a model-building approach where separate structural equation models were calculated for each family dimension and covariate and significant findings were integrated into a single model. Results supported the preexisting vulnerabilities and disruption hypotheses. Pre-COVID-19 family conflict, financial strain, and child externalizing problems were risks for parent mental health problems. Disruption effects were evident, such that increases in family conflict and increases in financial strain each predicted worse parent mental health. Family cohesion, routines, and social support did not predict parent's mental health outcomes. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2026 APA, all rights reserved).
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".