ArticleFrontiers in psychology2026
Exploring the association of respiratory infection aetiology with mental well-being scores: a longitudinal study.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Acute respiratory infections can disrupt both physical and psychological well-being. This study aimed to examine whether mental well-being differed according to respiratory infection aetiology during the first year of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic and to identify factors associated with mental well-being over time. Methods: This prospective observational cohort study included 819 adults from nine European countries recruited during 2020 and 2021 as part of the SOS-COVID study. Mental well-being was assessed using the WHO-5 Well-Being Index at day 7 and day 28 following enrolment. Respiratory infection aetiology was classified as SARS-CoV-2, other viral infection, or no virus detected, and additionally grouped as SARS-CoV-2 versus no SARS-CoV-2 detected. Linear mixed-effects models with patients nested within countries examined associations between infection type and well-being scores, adjusting for age, recovery duration and time period. Results: Median WHO-5 well-being scores increased from 13 at day 7 to 18 at day 28. Participants with SARS-CoV-2 infection reported lower median well-being scores (12 and 17 at day 7 and day 28, respectively) compared with other viral infections (15 and 19), non-SARS-CoV-2 infections (13 and 18), and no virus detected (13 and 17). In adjusted analyses, lower day 28 well-being was associated with longer recovery duration (coef = -0.1, 95% CI: -0.2 to -0.1), SARS-CoV-2 infection (coef = -1.1, 95% CI: -1.8 to -0.3), recruitment during July to September and October to December 2020, and increasing age. Approximately 32% of variance in well-being occurred at the country level. Conclusion: SARS-CoV-2 infection was associated with lower mental well-being scores, particularly 1 month following enrolment, compared with other respiratory infection groups. Recovery duration and recruitment period also influenced well-being outcomes, suggesting that both infection-specific and contextual pandemic-related factors contributed to reduced mental well-being.
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.