Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36262228›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in public health2022

Psychological well-being in times of COVID-19: Associated factors and levels in the general population.

Sara Ebling, Omid V Ebrahimi, Sverre Urnes Johnson, Nora Skjerdingstad, Asle Hoffart

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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.

Sara EblingDepartment of Psychology, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway.
Omid V EbrahimiDepartment of Psychology, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.
Sverre Urnes JohnsonDepartment of Psychology, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.
Nora SkjerdingstadDepartment of Psychology, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.
Asle HoffartDepartment of Psychology, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The COVID-19 pandemic and living under social distancing restrictions have been hypothesized to impact well-being and mental health in the general population. This study investigated the general Norwegian adult population's well-being after implementing and lifting strict social distancing restrictions. The study was conducted through digital surveys; during the implementation of strict social distancing restrictions in March 2020 (T1) and 3 months later, when the preponderance of strict distancing restrictions was discontinued (T2). Well-being was measured at T2. Four thousand nine hundred twenty-one individuals participated, and a sensitivity analysis was conducted to ensure that the sample reflects the true Norwegian adult population. Hierarchical regression analyses show that contemporaneous employment status and positive metacognitions at T2 were associated with higher well-being. Negative metacognitions and the use of unhelpful coping strategies at T2 had a contemporaneous association with lower mental well-being. Negative metacognitions at T1 were associated with lower well-being scores, while positive metacognitions at T1 were positively associated with higher well-being. An indirect association between social distancing and lower well-being was found through heightened depressive symptoms. These results contribute to understanding how social distancing restrictions relate to general well-being, which may further contribute to designing proper strategies to strengthen mental health and well-being during challenging and unavoidable societal conditions.

Indexed as

COVID-19AdultHumansMental HealthPandemicsPhysical DistancingSurveys and QuestionnairesCOVID-19mental healthmetacognitionssocial distancingwell-being

Identifiers

PMID36262228
PMCPMC9574009

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.