MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6901956385 · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.18982828

A longitudinal investigation of psychological distress in children during COVID-19: the role of socio-emotional vulnerability

2022· article· en· W6901956385 on OpenAlexaffabout

Bibliographic record

VenueFigshare · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalInstitut universitaire en santé mentale de MontréalUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnxietyAnxiety sensitivityDistressRuminationObservational studyDepression (economics)Trait anxietyState-Trait Anxiety InventoryLongitudinal studyVulnerability (computing)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although the COVID-19 pandemic has increased the incidence of distress in youth, some children show increased resilience, emphasizing the need to better understand the predictors of distress in youth. This longitudinal study aimed to assess the combined impact of known socio-emotional predictors of stress-related psychopathology, namely anxiety sensitivity, anxiety trait, intolerance to uncertainty, and rumination, on COVID-related distress in healthy youth. A total of 92 parent-child dyads that previously participated in a laboratory-based experiment assessing observational fear learning in families between 2017 and 2019 (T0) were recontacted. Of them, 84 children aged between 9 and 14 agreed to participate. They completed online questionnaires in June 2020 (T1), September 2020 (T2), December 2020 (T3), and March 2021 (T4). Participants were free of mental illness at T0 and T1. To create a socio-emotional composite score (SECS), we measured anxiety sensitivity (Childhood Anxiety Sensitivity Index) at T0, trait anxiety (Trait subscale of the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory for Children (STAI-C)), intolerance to uncertainty (Intolerance of Uncertainty Scale for Children), and trait rumination (Children’s Response Style Scale) at T1 and created a weighted z-score. To assess symptoms of anxiety, post-traumatic stress (PTS), and depression in reaction to COVID-19, participants completed the State subscale of the STAI-C, the Children’s Revised Impact of Event Scale, and the Children’s Depression Inventory at T1–T4. Three general linear models were run with sex, age group (9–11 and 12+ years old), and SECS as predictors. Analyses revealed a SECS*Time interaction, with higher SECS predicting elevated anxiety symptoms at T1 and T4, and elevated PTS symptoms at T1 and T2. These results suggest that healthy youth endorsing high levels of socio-emotional vulnerability to psychopathology have a higher risk of suffering from anxiety and PTS, but not depressive symptoms, in the year following a major stressor. This longitudinal study conducted in Quebec, Canada shows that healthy youth endorsing elevated socio-emotional vulnerability, as assessed by a composite score, report greater post-traumatic stress and anxiety symptoms, but not depressive symptoms in response to the COVID-19 pandemic.The study also reveals that girls and adolescents present greater symptomatology as opposed to boys and younger children. This longitudinal study conducted in Quebec, Canada shows that healthy youth endorsing elevated socio-emotional vulnerability, as assessed by a composite score, report greater post-traumatic stress and anxiety symptoms, but not depressive symptoms in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. The study also reveals that girls and adolescents present greater symptomatology as opposed to boys and younger children.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.071
GPT teacher head0.365
Teacher spread0.294 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFigshare→Same topicAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes→French-language works237,207→