Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34514466›Full record

ArticleJCPP advances2021

COVID-19 partial school closures and mental health problems: A cross-sectional survey of 11,000 adolescents to determine those most at risk.

Karen L Mansfield, Danielle Newby, Emma Soneson, Nemanja Vaci, Christoph Jindra, Galit Geulayov, John Gallacher, Mina Fazel

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JCPP advances, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
20.3field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

28 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 49 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Parental Perceptions Related to Co-Administration of Adolescent COVID-19 and Routine Vaccines.The Journal of adolescent health : official publication of the Society for Adolescent Medicine · 2023
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Karen L MansfieldDepartment of Psychiatry University of Oxford Oxford UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0342-7926
Danielle NewbyDepartment of Psychiatry University of Oxford Oxford UK.
Emma SonesonDepartment of Psychiatry University of Cambridge Cambridge UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1666-3012
Nemanja VaciDepartment of Psychology University of Sheffield Sheffield UK.
Christoph JindraInstitut zur Qualitätsentwicklung im Bildungswesen Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin Berlin Germany.
Galit GeulayovDepartment of Psychiatry University of Oxford Oxford UK.
John GallacherDepartment of Psychiatry University of Oxford Oxford UK.
Mina FazelDepartment of Psychiatry University of Oxford Oxford UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9342-2365
University of Oxford · GBHumboldt-Universität zu Berlin · DEUniversity of Cambridge · GBUniversity of Sheffield · GB

Funding

Medical Research Council MC_PC_17215
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundUnderstanding adolescents' mental health during lockdown and identifying those most at risk is an urgent public health challenge. This study surveyed school pupils across Southern England during the first COVID-19 school lockdown to investigate situational factors associated with mental health difficulties and how they relate to pupils' access to in-school educational provision.

methodsA total of 11,765 pupils in years 8-13 completed a survey in June-July 2020, including questions on mental health, risk indicators and access to school provision. Pupils at home were compared to those accessing in-school provision on risk and contextual factors and mental health outcomes. Multilevel logistic regression analyses compared the effect of eight risk and contextual factors, including access to in-school provision, on depression, anxiety and self-reported deterioration in mental wellbeing.

resultsFemales, pupils who had experienced food poverty and those who had previously accessed mental health support were at greatest risk of depression, anxiety and a deterioration in wellbeing. Pupils whose parents were going out to work and those preparing for national examinations in the subsequent school year were also at increased risk. Pupils accessing in-school provision had poorer mental health, but this was accounted for by the background risk and contextual factors assessed, in line with the allocation of in-school places to more vulnerable pupils.

conclusionsAlthough the strongest associations with poor mental health during school closures were established risk factors, further contextual factors of particular relevance during lockdown had negative impacts on wellbeing. Identifying those pupils at greatest risk for poor outcomes is critical for ensuring that appropriate educational and social support can be given to pupils either at home or in-school during subsequent lockdowns.

Indexed as

adolescentCOVID‐19mental healthschool

Identifiers

PMID34514466
PMCPMC8420157
OpenAlexW3170315856

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.