6
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
3 collections
    0
    shares

      Submit your digital health research with an established publisher
      - celebrating 25 years of open access

      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Psychological Resilience Factors and Their Association With Weekly Stressor Reactivity During the COVID-19 Outbreak in Europe: Prospective Longitudinal Study

      research-article
      , MSc 1 , , , PhD 2 , 3 , , PhD 4 , , MSc 5 , , PhD 4 , 6 , , PhD 7 , 8 , , PhD 2 , 5 , , PhD 8 , , PhD 9 , 10 , , MSc 4 , , MSc 11 , , MSc 12 , , MSc 1 , , MSc 11 , , BSc 13 , , PhD 14 , , PhD 15 , , PhD 15 , , PhD 16 , , PhD 9 , 10 , , MD, PhD 2 , 17 , , PhD 1 , , PhD 11 , , PhD 12 , , MD, PhD 4 , 6 , , MD, PhD 2 , 17 , 18 , , PhD 1 , , PhD 4 , 19 , , PhD 2 , 5
      (Reviewer), (Reviewer)
      JMIR Mental Health
      JMIR Publications
      resilience, stressor reactivity, positive appraisal, pandemic, mental health, COVID-19

      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

          Background

          Cross-sectional relationships between psychosocial resilience factors (RFs) and resilience, operationalized as the outcome of low mental health reactivity to stressor exposure (low “stressor reactivity” [SR]), were reported during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020.

          Objective

          Extending these findings, we here examined prospective relationships and weekly dynamics between the same RFs and SR in a longitudinal sample during the aftermath of the first wave in several European countries.

          Methods

          Over 5 weeks of app-based assessments, participants reported weekly stressor exposure, mental health problems, RFs, and demographic data in 1 of 6 different languages. As (partly) preregistered, hypotheses were tested cross-sectionally at baseline (N=558), and longitudinally (n=200), using mixed effects models and mediation analyses.

          Results

          RFs at baseline, including positive appraisal style (PAS), optimism (OPT), general self-efficacy (GSE), perceived good stress recovery (REC), and perceived social support (PSS), were negatively associated with SR scores, not only cross-sectionally (baseline SR scores; all P<.001) but also prospectively (average SR scores across subsequent weeks; positive appraisal (PA), P=.008; OPT, P<.001; GSE, P=.01; REC, P<.001; and PSS, P=.002). In both associations, PAS mediated the effects of PSS on SR (cross-sectionally: 95% CI –0.064 to –0.013; prospectively: 95% CI –0.074 to –0.0008). In the analyses of weekly RF-SR dynamics, the RFs PA of stressors generally and specifically related to the COVID-19 pandemic, and GSE were negatively associated with SR in a contemporaneous fashion (PA, P<.001; PAC, P=.03; and GSE, P<.001), but not in a lagged fashion (PA, P=.36; PAC, P=.52; and GSE, P=.06).

          Conclusions

          We identified psychological RFs that prospectively predict resilience and cofluctuate with weekly SR within individuals. These prospective results endorse that the previously reported RF-SR associations do not exclusively reflect mood congruency or other temporal bias effects. We further confirm the important role of PA in resilience.

          Related collections

          Most cited references65

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

          Fitting Linear Mixed-Effects Models Usinglme4

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            A nationwide survey of psychological distress among Chinese people in the COVID-19 epidemic: implications and policy recommendations

            The Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) epidemic emerged in Wuhan, China, spread nationwide and then onto half a dozen other countries between December 2019 and early 2020. The implementation of unprecedented strict quarantine measures in China has kept a large number of people in isolation and affected many aspects of people’s lives. It has also triggered a wide variety of psychological problems, such as panic disorder, anxiety and depression. This study is the first nationwide large-scale survey of psychological distress in the general population of China during the COVID-19 epidemic.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              A global panel database of pandemic policies (Oxford COVID-19 Government Response Tracker)

              COVID-19 has prompted unprecedented government action around the world. We introduce the Oxford COVID-19 Government Response Tracker (OxCGRT), a dataset that addresses the need for continuously updated, readily usable and comparable information on policy measures. From 1 January 2020, the data capture government policies related to closure and containment, health and economic policy for more than 180 countries, plus several countries' subnational jurisdictions. Policy responses are recorded on ordinal or continuous scales for 19 policy areas, capturing variation in degree of response. We present two motivating applications of the data, highlighting patterns in the timing of policy adoption and subsequent policy easing and reimposition, and illustrating how the data can be combined with behavioural and epidemiological indicators. This database enables researchers and policymakers to explore the empirical effects of policy responses on the spread of COVID-19 cases and deaths, as well as on economic and social welfare.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                JMIR Ment Health
                JMIR Ment Health
                JMH
                JMIR Mental Health
                JMIR Publications (Toronto, Canada )
                2368-7959
                2023
                17 October 2023
                : 10
                : e46518
                Affiliations
                [1 ] Donders Institute for Brain, Cognition and Behaviour Radboud University Medical Center Nijmegen Netherlands
                [2 ] Leibniz Institute for Resilience Research (LIR) Mainz Germany
                [3 ] Max Planck Institute for Human Cognitive and Brain Sciences Leipzig Germany
                [4 ] Research Division of Mind and Brain Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Charité Campus Mitte Charité – Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin Berlin Germany
                [5 ] Neuroimaging Center (NIC) Focus Program Translational Neuroscience (FTN) Johannes Gutenberg University Medical Center Mainz Germany
                [6 ] Berlin School of Mind and Brain Faculty of Philosophy Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin Berlin Germany
                [7 ] Institute of Medical Biometry and Statistics Faculty of Medicine and Medical Center University of Freiburg Freiburg Germany
                [8 ] Freiburg Center for Data Analysis and Modelling Institute of Physics University of Freiburg Freiburg Germany
                [9 ] Division of Experimental Psychopathology and Psychotherapy Department of Psychology University of Zurich Zurich Switzerland
                [10 ] Department of Psychiatry, Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics Psychiatric University Hospital (PUK) University of Zurich Zurich Switzerland
                [11 ] Faculty of Psychology University of Warsaw Warsaw Poland
                [12 ] Center for Contextual Psychiatry Department of Neurosciences KU Leuven Leuven Belgium
                [13 ] College of Inter-Faculty Individual Studies in Mathematics and Natural Sciences University of Warsaw Warsaw Poland
                [14 ] Concentris Research Management GmbH Fürstenfeldbruck Germany
                [15 ] Research Group of Quantitative Psychology and Individual Differences Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences KU Leuven Leuven Belgium
                [16 ] Institute of Psychology Goethe University Frankfurt Frankfurt am Main Germany
                [17 ] Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy Johannes Gutenberg University Medical Center Mainz Germany
                [18 ] Institute of Molecular Biology (IMB) Mainz Germany
                [19 ] Department of Developmental Psychology University of Amsterdam Amsterdam Netherlands
                Author notes
                Corresponding Author: Sophie A Bögemann Sophie.Bogemann@ 123456donders.ru.nl
                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9382-0769
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0870-8770
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5689-3472
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2684-3271
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8749-5349
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7038-0860
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9465-9070
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5441-9507
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4301-3269
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8633-9651
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0001-7190
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6288-795X
                https://orcid.org/0009-0009-1699-8315
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9717-5784
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5482-3745
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0548-1408
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5077-861X
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2199-1072
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6308-9466
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9114-2917
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9609-4261
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7105-0038
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0184-2595
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3731-4930
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9403-6121
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4023-5301
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1339-8639
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6733-3593
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9503-7601
                Article
                v10i1e46518
                10.2196/46518
                10618882
                37847551
                695ed61a-5bd5-4064-b501-8171869ca102
                ©Sophie A Bögemann, Lara M C Puhlmann, Carolin Wackerhagen, Matthias Zerban, Antje Riepenhausen, Göran Köber, Kenneth S L Yuen, Shakoor Pooseh, Marta A Marciniak, Zala Reppmann, Aleksandra Uściƚko, Jeroen Weermeijer, Dionne B Lenferink, Julian Mituniewicz, Natalia Robak, Nina C Donner, Merijn Mestdagh, Stijn Verdonck, Rolf van Dick, Birgit Kleim, Klaus Lieb, Judith M C van Leeuwen, Dorota Kobylińska, Inez Myin-Germeys, Henrik Walter, Oliver Tüscher, Erno J Hermans, Ilya M Veer, Raffael Kalisch. Originally published in JMIR Mental Health (https://mental.jmir.org), 17.10.2023.

                This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work, first published in JMIR Mental Health, is properly cited. The complete bibliographic information, a link to the original publication on https://mental.jmir.org/, as well as this copyright and license information must be included.

                History
                : 15 February 2023
                : 19 June 2023
                : 26 July 2023
                : 28 July 2023
                Categories
                Original Paper
                Original Paper

                resilience,stressor reactivity,positive appraisal,pandemic,mental health,covid-19

                Comments

                Comment on this article