Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35500314›Full record

ArticleSocial science & medicine (1982)2022

Managing disruption at a distance: Unequal experiences of people living with long-term conditions during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Stephanie Morris, Josephine M Wildman, Kate Gibson, Suzanne Moffatt, Tessa M Pollard

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Social science & medicine (1982), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Linking Social Prescribing and Lifestyle RedesignCanadian journal of occupational therapy. Revue canadienne d'ergotherapie · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Implementation and impact of a social prescribing intervention: an ethnographic exploration.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2023
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
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

5 authors.

Stephanie MorrisDepartment of Anthropology, Durham University, Dawson Building, South Road, Durham, DH1 3LE, UK; Population Health Sciences Institute, Faculty of Medical Sciences, Sir James Spence Institute, Royal Victoria Infirmary, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE1 4LP, UK. Electronic address: steph.morris@newcastle.ac.uk.
Josephine M WildmanPopulation Health Sciences Institute, Faculty of Medical Sciences, Sir James Spence Institute, Royal Victoria Infirmary, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE1 4LP, UK.
Kate GibsonPopulation Health Sciences Institute, Faculty of Medical Sciences, Sir James Spence Institute, Royal Victoria Infirmary, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE1 4LP, UK.
Suzanne MoffattPopulation Health Sciences Institute, Faculty of Medical Sciences, Sir James Spence Institute, Royal Victoria Infirmary, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE1 4LP, UK.
Tessa M PollardDepartment of Anthropology, Durham University, Dawson Building, South Road, Durham, DH1 3LE, UK.

Funding

Department of Health 16/122/33
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The COVID-19 pandemic and 'lockdown' restrictions have affected people's health and wellbeing globally. Those who are clinically vulnerable to COVID-19 mortality due to living with long term conditions (LTCs) are at greater risk of negative impacts on their health and wellbeing, and of disruption in management of their LTCs. This study explores how people with LTCs managed their health and wellbeing under social distancing restrictions and self-isolation during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, and examines why some people were more able to manage than others. Interviews were conducted between May and July 2020 with people (n = 44) living in North East England, who had one or more LTCs and were recruited via a social prescribing intervention. Data were analysed using a social constructivist thematic analysis. We present our analysis of the possibilities afforded to people to manage the impacts of lockdown on their health and wellbeing. We find that while some people deployed a range of capitals and/or etched out 'tactics' to make life 'habitable', others experienced 'zones of impossibility' requiring that they rely on contingent events or formal support. Our analysis highlights inequalities amongst people with LTCs, particularly regarding access to and deployment of important resources for health and wellbeing under COVID-19 social distancing restrictions, including outdoor space or greenspace, exercise and social connection. The study is novel in showing the mechanisms for coping with a significant period of disruption in the life-course whilst highlighting that although resilience was common in people with LTCs, this was sometimes at detrimental costs to themselves.

Indexed as

COVID-19Communicable Disease ControlEnglandHumansPandemicsPhysical DistancingBiographical disruptionCOVID-19Long term conditionsQualitative researchSelf-management

Identifiers

PMID35500314
PMCPMC8990438

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.