For Publishers
DiscoveryMetadataPeer reviewHostingPublishing
For Researchers
JoinPublishReviewCollect
Register
Blog
About
Search
Advanced search
My ScienceOpen
Search
For Publishers
For Researchers
Blog
About
53
views
41
references
 Top references
cited by
101
    
0 reviews
 Review
0
comments
 Comment
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      418
      similar
       All similar
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      A Qualitative Study of Child and Adolescent Mental Health during the COVID-19 Pandemic in Ireland

      research-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Mitigating the adverse physical health risks associated with COVID-19 has been a priority of public health incentives. Less attention has been placed on understanding the psychological factors related to the global pandemic, especially among vulnerable populations. This qualitative study sought to understand the experiences of children and adolescents during COVID-19. This study interviewed 48 families during the COVID-19 pandemic restrictions, and a national lockdown, to understand its impacts. The study used an Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis (IPA) methodology. Parents and children discussed the negative impact of the restrictions on young people’s wellbeing. Children and adolescents experienced adverse mental health effects, including feelings of social isolation, depression, anxiety, and increases in maladaptive behaviour. Families with children with Autism Spectrum Disorders reported increased mental health difficulties during this period mostly due to changes to routine. The findings highlight the impact of severe restrictions on vulnerable populations’ wellbeing and mental health outcomes, including children, adolescents, and those with Autism spectrum disorder (ASD).

          Related collections

          Most cited references41

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          The psychological impact of quarantine and how to reduce it: rapid review of the evidence

          Samantha K. Brooks, Rebecca K Webster, Louise E. Smith … (2022)
          Summary The December, 2019 coronavirus disease outbreak has seen many countries ask people who have potentially come into contact with the infection to isolate themselves at home or in a dedicated quarantine facility. Decisions on how to apply quarantine should be based on the best available evidence. We did a Review of the psychological impact of quarantine using three electronic databases. Of 3166 papers found, 24 are included in this Review. Most reviewed studies reported negative psychological effects including post-traumatic stress symptoms, confusion, and anger. Stressors included longer quarantine duration, infection fears, frustration, boredom, inadequate supplies, inadequate information, financial loss, and stigma. Some researchers have suggested long-lasting effects. In situations where quarantine is deemed necessary, officials should quarantine individuals for no longer than required, provide clear rationale for quarantine and information about protocols, and ensure sufficient supplies are provided. Appeals to altruism by reminding the public about the benefits of quarantine to wider society can be favourable.
          Article 0 comments Cited 5564 times – based on 0 reviews     Review now
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Estimates of the severity of coronavirus disease 2019: a model-based analysis

            Robert Verity, Lucy C Okell, Ilaria Dorigatti … (2020)
            Summary Background In the face of rapidly changing data, a range of case fatality ratio estimates for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) have been produced that differ substantially in magnitude. We aimed to provide robust estimates, accounting for censoring and ascertainment biases. Methods We collected individual-case data for patients who died from COVID-19 in Hubei, mainland China (reported by national and provincial health commissions to Feb 8, 2020), and for cases outside of mainland China (from government or ministry of health websites and media reports for 37 countries, as well as Hong Kong and Macau, until Feb 25, 2020). These individual-case data were used to estimate the time between onset of symptoms and outcome (death or discharge from hospital). We next obtained age-stratified estimates of the case fatality ratio by relating the aggregate distribution of cases to the observed cumulative deaths in China, assuming a constant attack rate by age and adjusting for demography and age-based and location-based under-ascertainment. We also estimated the case fatality ratio from individual line-list data on 1334 cases identified outside of mainland China. Using data on the prevalence of PCR-confirmed cases in international residents repatriated from China, we obtained age-stratified estimates of the infection fatality ratio. Furthermore, data on age-stratified severity in a subset of 3665 cases from China were used to estimate the proportion of infected individuals who are likely to require hospitalisation. Findings Using data on 24 deaths that occurred in mainland China and 165 recoveries outside of China, we estimated the mean duration from onset of symptoms to death to be 17·8 days (95% credible interval [CrI] 16·9–19·2) and to hospital discharge to be 24·7 days (22·9–28·1). In all laboratory confirmed and clinically diagnosed cases from mainland China (n=70 117), we estimated a crude case fatality ratio (adjusted for censoring) of 3·67% (95% CrI 3·56–3·80). However, after further adjusting for demography and under-ascertainment, we obtained a best estimate of the case fatality ratio in China of 1·38% (1·23–1·53), with substantially higher ratios in older age groups (0·32% [0·27–0·38] in those aged <60 years vs 6·4% [5·7–7·2] in those aged ≥60 years), up to 13·4% (11·2–15·9) in those aged 80 years or older. Estimates of case fatality ratio from international cases stratified by age were consistent with those from China (parametric estimate 1·4% [0·4–3·5] in those aged <60 years [n=360] and 4·5% [1·8–11·1] in those aged ≥60 years [n=151]). Our estimated overall infection fatality ratio for China was 0·66% (0·39–1·33), with an increasing profile with age. Similarly, estimates of the proportion of infected individuals likely to be hospitalised increased with age up to a maximum of 18·4% (11·0–7·6) in those aged 80 years or older. Interpretation These early estimates give an indication of the fatality ratio across the spectrum of COVID-19 disease and show a strong age gradient in risk of death. Funding UK Medical Research Council.
            Article 0 comments Cited 1740 times – based on 0 reviews     Review now
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Rapid Systematic Review: The Impact of Social Isolation and Loneliness on the Mental Health of Children and Adolescents in the Context of COVID-19

              Maria Loades, Eleanor Chatburn, Nina Higson-Sweeney … (2020)
              Objective Disease containment of COVID-19 has necessitated widespread social isolation. We aimed to establish what is known about how loneliness and disease containment measures impact on the mental health in children and adolescents. Method For this rapid review, we searched MEDLINE, PSYCHINFO, and Web of Science for articles published between 01/01/1946 and 03/29/2020. 20% of articles were double screened using pre-defined criteria and 20% of data was double extracted for quality assurance. Results 83 articles (80 studies) met inclusion criteria. Of these, 63 studies reported on the impact of social isolation and loneliness on the mental health of previously healthy children and adolescents (n=51,576; mean age 15.3) 61 studies were observational; 18 were longitudinal and 43 cross sectional studies assessing self-reported loneliness in healthy children and adolescents. One of these studies was a retrospective investigation after a pandemic. Two studies evaluated interventions. Studies had a high risk of bias although longitudinal studies were of better methodological quality. Social isolation and loneliness increased the risk of depression, and possibly anxiety at the time loneliness was measured and between 0.25 to 9 years later. Duration of loneliness was more strongly correlated with mental health symptoms than intensity of loneliness. Conclusion Children and adolescents are probably more likely to experience high rates of depression and probably anxiety during and after enforced isolation ends. This may increase as enforced isolation continues. Clinical services should offer preventative support and early intervention where possible and be prepared for an increase in mental health problems.
              Article 0 comments Cited 988 times – based on 0 reviews     Review now
                Bookmark
                All references

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Journal ID (nlm-ta): Int J Environ Res Public Health
                Journal ID (iso-abbrev): Int J Environ Res Public Health
                Journal ID (publisher-id): ijerph
                Title: International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
                Publisher: MDPI
                ISSN (Print): 1661-7827
                ISSN (Electronic): 1660-4601
                Publication date (Electronic): 25 January 2021
                Publication date (Print): February 2021
                Volume: 18
                Issue: 3
                Electronic Location Identifier: 1062
                Affiliations
                Department of Psychology, The National University of Ireland, Maynooth W23 F2H, Ireland; Serena.clark@ 123456mu.ie (S.C.); amy.mcgrane@ 123456mu.ie (A.M.); nicolerock93@ 123456yahoo.com (N.R.); lydiaburke34@ 123456yahoo.com (L.B.); neasa.boyle.2019@ 123456mumail.ie (N.B.); natasha.joksimovic.2019@ 123456mumail.ie (N.J.); kevmar@ 123456microsoft.com (K.M.)
                Author notes
                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7202-0033
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8405-576X
                Article
                Publisher ID: ijerph-18-01062
                DOI: 10.3390/ijerph18031062
                PMC ID: 7908364
                PubMed ID: 33504101
                SO-VID: 33e779c0-ca61-4f69-9be0-27191976eb47
                Copyright © © 2021 by the authors.
                License:

                Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

                History
                Date received : 17 December 2020
                Date accepted : 18 January 2021
                Categories
                Subject: Article

                ScienceOpen disciplines: Public health
                Keywords: mental health,psychological harm,vulnerable groups
                Data availability:
                ScienceOpen disciplines: Public health
                Keywords: mental health, psychological harm, vulnerable groups

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                scite_

                Similar content418

                See all similar

                Cited by99

                See all cited by

                Most referenced authors3,105

                See all reference authors