Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41868852›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychiatry2026

Dynamics of psychological distress: understanding the impact of intraindividual and interindividual factors in the Belgian population during the COVID-19 pandemic-a multilevel prospective cohort study.

Camille Duveau, Pablo Nicaise, Pierre Smith, Katharina Seeber, Richard Bryant, Giovanni Corrao, Mireia Félez-Nóbrega, Josep Maria Haro, Irwin Hecker, Kerry Rodríguez McGreevy and 10 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychiatry, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

20 authors.

Camille DuveauInstitute of Health and Society (IRSS), Université catholique de Louvain (UCLouvain), Brussels, Belgium.
Pablo NicaiseInstitute of Health and Society (IRSS), Université catholique de Louvain (UCLouvain), Brussels, Belgium.
Pierre SmithInstitute of Health and Society (IRSS), Université catholique de Louvain (UCLouvain), Brussels, Belgium.
Katharina SeeberInstitute of Health and Society (IRSS), Université catholique de Louvain (UCLouvain), Brussels, Belgium.
Richard BryantSchool of Psychology, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Giovanni CorraoUnit of Biostatistics, Epidemiology and Public Health, Department of Statistics and Quantitative Methods, University of Milano-Bicocca, Milan, Italy.
Mireia Félez-NóbregaResearch and Development Unit, Parc Sanitari Sant Joan de Déu, Sant Boi de Llobregat, Spain.
Josep Maria HaroResearch and Development Unit, Parc Sanitari Sant Joan de Déu, Sant Boi de Llobregat, Spain.
Irwin HeckerDépartement d'Epidémiologie Sociale, Institut Pierre Louis d'Epidémiologie et de Santé Publique, Institut national de la santé et de la recherche médicale (INSERM), Sorbonne Université, Paris, France.
Kerry Rodríguez McGreevyCentre for Biomedical Research on Mental Health (CIBERSAM), Madrid, Spain.
Roberto MediavillaCentre for Biomedical Research on Mental Health (CIBERSAM), Madrid, Spain.
Maria MelchiorDépartement d'Epidémiologie Sociale, Institut Pierre Louis d'Epidémiologie et de Santé Publique, Institut national de la santé et de la recherche médicale (INSERM), Sorbonne Université, Paris, France.
Ellenor Mittendorfer-RutzDepartment of Clinical Neuroscience, Division of Insurance Medicine, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Matteo Monzio CompagnoniUnit of Biostatistics, Epidemiology and Public Health, Department of Statistics and Quantitative Methods, University of Milano-Bicocca, Milan, Italy.
Papoula Petri-RomãoLeibniz Institute for Resilience Research, Mainz, Germany.
Antje RiepenhausenDepartment of Psychiatry and Neurosciences CCM, Research Division of Mind and Brain, Charité, Berlin, Germany.
Jutta Stoffers-WinterlingLeibniz Institute for Resilience Research, Mainz, Germany.
Anke WitteveenDepartment of Clinical, Neuro- and Developmental Psychology, WHO Collaborating Centre for Research and Dissemination of Psychological Interventions, VU University, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
Marit SijbrandijDepartment of Clinical, Neuro- and Developmental Psychology, WHO Collaborating Centre for Research and Dissemination of Psychological Interventions, VU University, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
Vincent LorantInstitute of Health and Society (IRSS), Université catholique de Louvain (UCLouvain), Brussels, Belgium.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Longitudinal studies have identified an increase in psychological distress throughout the general population during the COVID-19 pandemic. Nevertheless, the determinants of the variation in psychological distress are unclear. This paper investigated factors that were likely to be associated with psychological distress variation: exposure to COVID-19 and psychosocial factors. Methods: Five waves of a prospective cohort survey were conducted with a convenience sample of the general population in Belgium between March 2020 and November 2021 (n=4,550). Psychological distress was measured using the GHQ-12. Two groups of exposures were investigated: self-reported exposure to COVID-19 and psychosocial factors (loneliness, social support, and social activities). We first partitioned the variance into an interindividual component (time-invariant) and an intraindividual component (time-variant). Linear mixed models were used for analysis. Results: Most of the variance in psychological distress was interindividual. For both sources of variance (interindividual and intraindividual), the change in psychological distress was mainly associated with psychosocial factors, rather than pandemic-related factors. Loneliness emerged as the factor most strongly associated both with interindividual and intraindividual differences in psychological distress. Discussion: Overall, these findings suggest that the variation in psychological distress between the waves was mostly influenced by social support, loneliness, and social activities, rather than by exposure to COVID-19. Mitigation policies aimed at controlling the pandemic should focus more on addressing specific individual psychosocial vulnerabilities.

Indexed as

BelgiumCOVID-19lonelinessmental healthpsychological distress

Identifiers

PMID41868852
PMCPMC13002600

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.