Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37098092›Full record

ArticlePloS one2023

Shaped by the COVID-19 pandemic: Psychological responses from a subjective perspective-A longitudinal mixed-methods study across five European countries.

Irina Zrnić Novaković, Dean Ajduković, Helena Bakić, Camila Borges, Margarida Figueiredo-Braga, Annett Lotzin, Xenia Anastassiou-Hadjicharalambous, Chrysanthi Lioupi, Jana Darejan Javakhishvili, Lela Tsiskarishvili and 1 more

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

11 authors.

Irina Zrnić NovakovićDepartment of Clinical and Health Psychology, Faculty of Psychology, University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.ORCID 0000-0002-8583-7234
Dean AjdukovićDepartment of Psychology, Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, University of Zagreb, Zagreb, Croatia.ORCID 0000-0001-9223-360X
Helena BakićDepartment of Psychology, Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, University of Zagreb, Zagreb, Croatia.
Camila BorgesTrauma Observatory, Centre for Social Studies (CES) of the University of Coimbra, Coimbra, Portugal.
Margarida Figueiredo-BragaTrauma Observatory, Centre for Social Studies (CES) of the University of Coimbra, Coimbra, Portugal.
Annett LotzinDepartment of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.
Xenia Anastassiou-HadjicharalambousDepartment of Social Sciences, School of Humanities, Social Sciences and Law, University of Nicosia, Nicosia, Cyprus.
Chrysanthi LioupiDepartment of Social Sciences, School of Humanities, Social Sciences and Law, University of Nicosia, Nicosia, Cyprus.
Jana Darejan JavakhishviliInstitute of Addiction Studies, School of Arts and Sciences, Ilia State University, Tbilisi, Georgia.
Lela TsiskarishviliSchool of Arts and Sciences, Ilia State University, Tbilisi, Georgia.
Brigitte Lueger-SchusterDepartment of Clinical and Health Psychology, Faculty of Psychology, University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.ORCID 0000-0003-0784-8437

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundContextual factors are essential for understanding long-term adjustment to the COVID-19 pandemic. Therefore, the present study investigated changes in mental health outcomes and subjective pandemic-related experiences over time and across countries. The main objective was to explore how psychological responses vary in relation to individual and environmental factors.

methodsThe sample consisted of N = 1070 participants from the general population of Austria, Croatia, Georgia, Greece, and Portugal. We applied a longitudinal mixed-methods approach, with baseline assessment in summer and autumn 2020 (T1) and follow-up assessment 12 months later (T2). Qualitative content analysis by Mayring was used to analyse open-ended questions about stressful events, positive and negative aspects of the pandemic, and recommendations on how to cope. Mental health outcomes were assessed with the Adjustment Disorder-New Module 8 (ADNM-8), the Primary Care PTSD Screen for DSM-5 (PC-PTSD-5), the Patient Health Questionnaire-2 (PHQ-2), and the 5-item World Health Organization Well-Being Index (WHO-5). The analyses were performed with SPSS Statistics Version 26 and MAXQDA 2022.

resultsThe mental health outcomes significantly differed over time and across countries, with e.g. Greek participants showing decrease in adjustment disorder symptoms (p = .007) between T1 and T2. Compared with other countries, we found better mental health outcomes in the Austrian and the Croatian sample at both timepoints (p < .05). Regarding qualitative data, some themes were equally represented at both timepoints (e.g. Restrictions and changes in daily life), while others were more prominent at T1 (e.g. Work and finances) or T2 (e.g. Vaccination issues).

conclusionsOur findings indicate that people's reactions to the pandemic are largely shaped by the shifting context of the pandemic, country-specific factors, and individual characteristics and circumstances. Resource-oriented interventions focusing on psychological flexibility might promote resilience and mental health amidst the COVID-19 pandemic and other global crises.

Indexed as

COVID-19AustriaEuropeHumansMental HealthPandemics

Identifiers

PMID37098092
PMCPMC10128933

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.