ArticlePloS one2023
Predicting resilience during the COVID-19 Pandemic in the United Kingdom: Cross-sectional and longitudinal results.
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 13 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
13 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Observational
- Beyond individual traits: differential associations of social support profiles with resilience in older learners.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- Uncontrolled Eating Through the Lens of Mentalization and Emotional Eating: The Moderating Role of Food Addiction.Nutrients · 2025Article
- Psychological and Physical Health Improvements After Coronary Bypass: A Longitudinal Study in Cardiovascular Rehabilitation.European journal of investigation in health, psychology and education · 2025Article
- Mindfulness Improves Awareness and Cortisol Levels During COVID-19 Lockdown: A Randomised Controlled Trial in Healthcare Workers.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Death Anxiety and Resilience in Older Adults: The Moderating Role of Attachment Patterns.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- The Shield of Self-Esteem: Buffering against the Impact of Traumatic Experiences, Fear, Anxiety, and Depression.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Emotional Regulation, Coping, and Resilience in Informal Caregivers: A Network Analysis Approach.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Differential Anxiety Responses in Acute Myocardial Infarction vs. COVID-19 Pneumonia Patients.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2024Article
- Associations between mindfulness and mental health after collective trauma: results from a longitudinal, representative, probability-based survey.Anxiety, stress, and coping · 2024Article
- Assessing Discriminant Validity through Structural Equation Modeling: The Case of Eating Compulsivity.Nutrients · 2024Article
- The role of the COVID-19 impersonal threat strengthening the associations of right-wing attitudes, nationalism and anti-immigrant sentiments.Current psychology (New Brunswick, N.J.) · 2023Article
- Enhancing Mental Resilience Among Frontline Nurses Post-COVID-19: A Non-Randomized Study of mHealth-Based Group Coping Skills Training.SAGE open nursingArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
19 authors at 8 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Although the COVID-19 pandemic has impacted the psychological wellbeing of some people, there is evidence that many have been much less affected. The Ecological Model of Resilience (EMR) may explain why some individuals are not resilient whilst others are. In this study we test the EMR in a comparison of UK survey data collected from the COVID-19 Psychological Research Consortium (C19PRC) longitudinal study of a representative sample of the United Kingdom (UK) adult population and data from an Italian arm of the study. We first compare data from the third wave of the UK arm of the study, collected in July/August 2020, with data from an equivalent sample and stage of the pandemic in Italy in July 2020. Next, using UK longitudinal data collected from C19PRC Waves 1, 3 and 5, collected between March 2020 and April 2021 we identify the proportion of people who were resilient. Finally, we examine which factors, drawn from the EMR, predict resilient and non-resilient outcomes. We find that the 72% of the UK sample was resilient, in line with the Italian study. In the cross-sectional logistic regression model, age and self-esteem were significantly associated with resilience whilst death anxiety thoughts, neuroticism, loneliness, and Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) symptoms related to COVID-19 were significantly associated with Non-Resilient outcomes. In the longitudinal UK analysis, at Wave 5, 80% of the sample was Resilient. Service use, belonging to wider neighbourhood, self-rated health, self-esteem, openness, and externally generated death anxiety were associated with Resilient outcomes. In contrast, PTSD symptoms and loneliness were associated with Non-Resilient outcomes. The EMR effectively explained the results. There were some variables which are amenable to intervention which could increase resilience in the face of similar future challenges.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.