Skip to main content
Download PDF

Social factors associated with self-reported changes in mental health symptoms among youth in the COVID-19 pandemic: a cross-sectional survey

BMC Public Health volume 24, Article number: 631 (2024) Cite this article

Abstract

Background

Children and youth experienced marked impacts on day-to-day life in the COVID-19 pandemic that were associated with poorer familial and friend relationships, and greater mental health challenges. Few studies provide self-report data on mental health symptoms from children and youth themselves. We sought to examine the associations between social factors and child and youth self-reported symptoms of worsened mood, anxiety, and irritability during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Methods

A nationally representative cross-sectional survey was administered online to collect self-report data across 10 Canadian provinces among children (11–14 years) and youth (15–18 years), April–May 2022. Age-appropriate questions were based on The Partnership for Maternal, Newborn & Child Health and the World Health Organization of the United Nations H6 + Technical Working Group on Adolescent Health and Well-Being consensus framework and the Coronavirus Health and Impact Survey. Associations between a priori defined social factors (e.g., relationship quality) and respondent self-reported mental health were evaluated using ordinal logistic regression models adjusted for age, sex, and geographic location.

Results

We analyzed data from 483 (51.7%) children (11–14 years; 227, 47.0% girls) and 450 (48.3%) youth (15–18 years; 204, 45.3% girls). The parents of most children and youth had resided in Canada for over 20 years (678, 72.7%). Over one-quarter of children and youth self-identified as Black, Indigenous, or a Person of Color (134, 27.7%; 134, 29.8%, respectively). Over one-third of children and youth self-reported symptoms of worsened mood (149, 30.9%; 125, 27.8%, respectively), anxiety (181, 37.5%; 167, 37.1%, respectively), or irritability (160, 33.1%; 160, 35.6%, respectively) during, compared to pre-pandemic. In descending order of odds ratios (OR), for children and youth, worsened familial relationships (during compared to pre-pandemic) was associated with the self-reported symptoms of worsened mood (child: OR 4.22, 95%CI 2.51–6.88; youth: OR 6.65 95%CI 3.98–11.23), anxiety (child: OR 4.24, 95%CI2.69–6.75; youth: OR 5.28, 95%CI 3.17–8.86), and irritability (child: OR 2.83, 95%CI 1.76–4.56; youth: OR 6.46, 95%CI 3.88–10.90).

Conclusions

Self-reported data from a nationally representative sample of children and youth suggest strong associations between social factors and mental health during the COVID-19 pandemic. Interventions targeting child and youth familial relationships may positively impact child and youth mental health.

Peer Review reports

Introduction

Children and youth have experienced mental health problems with greater frequency since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic [1]. Across 29 studies, including 80,879 youth globally, the pooled prevalence estimates of child and youth depression and anxiety were 25.2% and 20.5%, respectively, having doubled compared to pre-pandemic estimates [2]. Other studies have reported increases in child and youth externalizing behaviors (e.g., hyperactivity and conduct problems) [3]. Lockdowns and school closures, in addition to disruptions to daily routines, have contributed to this increase in mental health difficulties among children and youth [4, 5], though most published studies have reported data from parents of children and youth while few provided self-report data from a nationally representative sample of children and youth themselves.

Especially among lower-income and less-educated families, as well as families from ethnic minority and vulnerable groups, pandemic-related disruptions coincided with negative impacts to social factors such as familial and friend relationships, and support for mental and physical wellbeing [6, 7]. Elevated symptoms of depression and anxiety in mothers of young children nearly doubled and tripled, respectively, from before the pandemic [2]. Increases in parental mental health problems during the COVID-19 pandemic impacted parenting behaviors and parent–child relationships; greater parental psychological distress was associated with a higher likelihood of engaging in more negative and fewer positive parenting practices during the pandemic [8]. Higher levels of depression in mothers and fathers were related to greater parent–child relationship conflict [9]. Pandemic stressors also had broader implications for entire social networks of children and youth, linked to poorer friendship quality which, in turn, was associated with greater mental health challenges [10, 11].

Extensive prior research on large-scale health, economic, and sociopolitical crises report short-and long-term health consequences for children, youth, and families. For example, studies conducted within pandemics prior to the COVID-19 pandemic (e.g., SARS, H1N1) documented inadequate adjustment (e.g., anxiety, depression, posttraumatic stress disorder) among children and youth who directly experienced pandemic-related stressors [12,13,14]. Similarly, momentous economic downturns, such as the Great Recession of 2008, have been linked to challenges with child and youth behavior problems, self-efficacy, and school attendance [15,16,17]. Within the COVID-19 pandemic, studies on family functioning found that individual emotions were influential amongst families with emotion contagion negatively impacting family regulation [18], while others reported large deteriorations in familial mental and behavioral health [19].

We previously conducted a large, nationally representative, multi-informant cross-sectional survey to report how mental health symptoms of children, youth, and their parents changed during COVID-19 compared to pre-pandemic times [20]. In that study, we found that children and youth were significantly less likely to self-report worsened mental health symptoms compared to their parents, and that children and youth most frequently self-reported symptoms of worsened mood, anxiety, and irritability. The objective of the present analytical study was to use child and youth self-report data from our cross-sectional survey to identify social factors associated with self-report symptoms of worsened mood, anxiety, and irritability among children and youth during the COVID-19 pandemic. Better understanding on the association of social factors with child and youth mental health provides the opportunity to reimagine how public mental health interventions are developed, tested, and implemented. Careful consideration of the aims and population-level impacts of child and youth mental health interventions complemented by assessment of interpersonal and environmental elements may facilitate more effective study of child and youth mental health during and after a public health crisis that does not shy away from complexity.

Methods

Study design and population

Data were collected from an anonymous, voluntary, 10-min cross-sectional survey administered by Leger, a Canadian-based market research and polling firm (https://leger360.com), between April 20, 2022, and May 25, 2022 (the time period that Canadian provinces had eased public health measures such as physical distancing and masking requirements) [21]. Leger uses a dynamic Leger Opinion (LEO) panel that is an online pool of over 400,000 individuals recruited and validated through multiple methods. Participants in the LEO panel consented to be contacted for research purposes and at any given time, reflect a representative sample of Canadian residents with internet access. Respondents to our survey received LEO reward points after completing the questionnaire that could be redeemed for gift cards and merchandise. Assuming children and youth aged 11–18 represent ~ 11% (~ 4 million) [22] of the Canadian population, we recruited 1600 respondents (800 parent–child/youth dyads (i.e., a group of two members)) to conduct subgroup analyses with a ± 3.5% margin of error at a 95% confidence level (95% CI). At least 15% of the sample was required to be dyads who had lived in Canada for fewer than 10 years; 5% of the sample was required to be dyads who had lived in Canada for less than 5 years. The (total) 85-item (English and French) electronic survey was administered to LEO panelists who identified as parents or legal guardians (> 18 years of age; hereafter referred to as parents) with at least one child (11–14 years of age) or youth (15–18 years of age) living in the same household; the oldest child or youth was selected if more than one was eligible. Age ranges for children and youth were selected to align with Statistics Canada standards and to adhere to institutional ethical requirements (e.g., age-tailored questions) [23]. Parents were asked the first 45-items, and their child or youth were asked the subsequent 40-items. We followed the Checklist for Reporting Results of Internet E-Surveys (CHERRIES) guidelines (Supplemental Table 1) [24].

Table 1 Demographics and characteristics of 933 child and youth participants
Full size table

Survey development

We created a preliminary list of social health and mental health questions based on findings presented in published articles identified in our scoping review [25] and systematic review [26] on strategies, approaches, and interventions targeted to improve youth wellbeing during the COVID-19 pandemic. Preliminary questions were mapped onto The Partnership for Maternal, Newborn & Child Health and the World Health Organization of the United Nations H6 + Technical Working Group on Adolescent Health and Well-Being consensus framework for defining, programming, and measuring adolescent wellbeing that is part of a broader program of work that includes a multi-user Call to Action to prioritize adolescent well-being [27]. This framework includes five domains: (1) Good health and optimum nutrition; (2) Connectedness, positive values, and contribution to society; (3) Safety and a supportive environment; (4) Learning, competence, education, skills, and employability; and (5) Agency and resilience (Supplemental Table 2). Demographic questions were based on the Coronavirus Health and Impact Survey (CRISIS) [28]. We developed a combination of continuous, categorial, Likert-type, and open-ended response options; Likert-type questions included a scale ranging from 1 (i.e., “a little”) to 5 (i.e., “a lot”). Questions were iteratively refined by the core survey development team (JPL, SJM, RBM, DMH, SAH, PT) [29] and six public citizen partners (three youth: MS, MH, SS, and three parents: KR, MS, AN). The order of the response options was randomized, and attention checks (i.e., innocuous questions with a single correct answer) were randomly inserted throughout the questionnaire. One question was presented per screen and respondents were able to change their answer once they moved to the next screen; all questions included a “don’t know” or “prefer not to answer” option that were excluded from analyses.

Outcomes

In our earlier work that reported on a multi-informant cross-sectional survey, we identified that children and youth most frequently self-reported symptoms of worsened mood, anxiety, and irritability [20]; these three variables were selected as primary outcomes for the present study. Respondents (children and youth) were asked, “Compared to the time before the COVID-19 pandemic, how is your [mood/anxiety/irritability]”. Operational, age-appropriate definitions for mental health symptoms provided to the participant at the time of survey conduction were as follows: 1) Mood (Parent and Youth: Poor mood might be when you feel empty, helpless, or inadequate, have low self-esteem or loss of interest in usual activities; Child: Feeling sad or down or not wanting to do the things that you like to do); 2) Anxiety (Parent and Youth: An emotion characterized by feelings of tension, worried thoughts, and physical changes like increased blood pressure; Child: Having thoughts or feelings that can be very scary or that worry you); and 3) Irritability (Parent and Youth: Irritability involves feelings of anger or frustration that often arise over even the smallest of things; Child: Being annoyed easily at things going on around you).

Social factors

Social factors were selected a priori based on findings from our scoping review [25], systematic review [26], and cross-sectional survey [20] in this research area. Social factors included self-reported “good” pre-pandemic physical health, mental health and nutrition (disagree versus neutral or agree), “good” physical health support and mental health support (disagree versus neutral or agree), distress related to school closures (extremely/very versus moderately/slightly/not at all), family and friend relations (worse versus about the same or better), sleep quantity (< 8 h versus 8 + hours per night), exercise quantity (< 3 days of 30 min (of organized sports and free play, cumulatively) versus 3 + days of 30 min (of organized sports and free play, cumulatively) per week), and social media quantity (4 + hours versus < 4 h per day).

Statistical analysis

Continuous variables were summarized using mean (standard deviation, SD) or median (interquartile range, IQR). Categorical variables were presented as frequency (percentage). Survey question responses were evaluated separately for children (11–14 years old) and youth (15–18 years old). Potential associations between a priori defined factors and respondent mental health outcomes (i.e., mood, anxiety, irritability) were evaluated using ordinal logistic regression models and reported as odds ratios with 95% confidence intervals for the odds of worsened mental health. Adjusted models included age (continuously, per year), sex (female as referent), and geographic location (Central, Atlantic, Prairie, British Columbia, with Central as referent). No missing data were present for any social factor or outcome variable. As these analyses were considered exploratory and hypothesis-generating, we did not adjust the statistical significance level for multiple testing; the width of reported confidence intervals may not be used in place of hypothesis testing as they have not been adjusted for multiplicity. All analyses were conducted using R version 4.2.1 [30].

Patient and public involvement

We abided by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR)-guiding core principles of inclusiveness, mutual respect, support, and co-building [31] and adhered to the GRIPP-2 reporting guidelines for patient and public involvement [32]. Youth and parent involvement in the current project began in 2021; they participated in group discussions alongside other stakeholders (e.g., researchers, clinicians, decision makers). The research questions, protocol, and this paper were jointly developed with youth (MS, SS, MH) and parent (AN, MS, KR) partners on this team. All youth and family partners were compensated for their time.

Ethical considerations

All participants provided electronic informed consent on their own behalf; as the parent had significant knowledge of their child/youth, prior to submitting their own consent, the parent attested that they understood the information regarding their child/youth’s participation and that their child/youth had the capacity to consent on their own behalf. This study was approved by the University of Calgary’s Conjoint Health Research Ethics Board (#21–2013) and the Research Ethics Board at Dalhousie University (#2021–5947); all methods were carried out according to research ethics board guidelines and regulations.

Results

Survey participants

We surveyed 483 (51.7%) children (aged 11–14 years; n = 227, 47.0% girls), and 450 (48.3%) youth (aged 15–18 years; n = 204, 45.3% girls) (Table 1; Supplemental Table 2). Children and youth were most commonly from households comprised of four or fewer members (n = 698, 74.8%), and most families had resided in Canada for over 20 years (n = 678, 72.7%). Over one-quarter of children and youth self-identified as Black, Indigenous, or a Person of Color (n = 134, 27.7%; n = 134, 29.8%, respectively).

Mental health outcomes

Children and youth in our sample self-reported symptoms of worsened mood (n = 149, 30.9%; n = 125, 27.8%, respectively), anxiety (n = 181, 37.5%; n = 167, 37.1%, respectively), or irritability (n = 160, 33.1%; n = 160, 35.6%, respectively) (Fig. 1).

Fig. 1
figure 1

Mental health impacts of 933 child/youth survey participants. Respondents were asked, Compared to the time before the COVID-19 pandemic, how is your [mental health domain]

Full size image

Mood

Children who experienced worsened familial relationships during compared to pre-pandemic (OR 4.22, 95%CI 2.61–6.88), worsened relationships with friends during compared to pre-pandemic (OR 2.41, 95%CI 1.62–3.61), or stress regarding school closures during the COVID-19 pandemic (OR 1.72, 95%CI 1.19–2.48), were more likely to self-report symptoms of worsened mood (Table 2). Children who exercised for 30 min on fewer than three days per week during COVID-19 were also more likely to self-report symptoms of decreased mood (OR 1.65, 95%CI 1.16–2.36). The potential predictors for symptoms of worsened mood among youth in our sample were worsened familial relationships during compared to pre-pandemic (OR 6.65, 95%CI 3.98–11.23), worsened relationships with friends during compared to pre-pandemic (OR 3.33, 95%CI 2.12–5.26), and stress regarding school closures during the COVID-19 pandemic (OR 2.24, 95%CI 1.52–3.32) (Table 3). Among youth poor pre-pandemic mental health (OR 1.56, 95%CI 1.02–2.39) and poor pre-pandemic mental health support (OR 1.57, 95%CI 1.00–2.45) were associated with symptoms of decreased mood.

Table 2 Adjusted multivariate analyses for child (11-14 years) mental health symptoms
Full size table
Table 3 Adjusted multivariate analyses for youth (15-18 years) mental health symptoms
Full size table

Anxiety

Worsened familial relationships during compared to pre-pandemic (OR 4.25, 95%CI 2.69–6.75), worsened relationships with friends during compared to pre-pandemic (OR 2.66, 95%CI 1.80–3.97), and stress related to school closures during the COVID-19 pandemic (OR 1.99, 95%CI 1.39–2.85) were associated with self-report symptoms of worsened anxiety among children (Table 2). Poor pre-pandemic mental health support—though not pre-pandemic poor mental health itself—was also associated with self-report symptoms of worsened anxiety for children (OR 1.54, 95%CI 1.01–2.36). Among youth, worsened familial relationships during compared to pre-pandemic (OR 5.28, 95%CI 3.17–8.86), worsened relationships with friends during compared to pre-pandemic (OR 2.62, 95%CI 1.69–4.05), and stress related to school closures during the COVID-19 pandemic (OR 2.58, 95%CI 1.76–3.79) were associated with self-report symptoms of worsened anxiety; poor pre-pandemic mental health (OR 1.84, 95%CI 1.21–2.81) was also associated with self-report symptoms of worsened anxiety, but poor pre-pandemic mental health support was not (Table 3).

Irritability

Children who experienced worsened familial relationships during compared to pre-pandemic (OR 2.83, 95%CI 1.76–4.56), worsened relationships with friends during compared to pre-pandemic (OR 2.33, 95%CI 1.56–3.48), stress related to school closures during the COVID-19 pandemic (OR 1.61, 95%CI 1.12–2.33), as well as those who on average slept less than eight hours per night during the COVID-19 pandemic (OR 1.48, 95%CI 1.04–2.12) were more likely to self-report symptoms of worsened irritability (Table 2). Among youth, every social factor tested but for sleep quantity was found to be associated with self-report symptoms of worsened irritability, with potential predictors being worsened familial relationships during compared to pre-pandemic (OR 6.46, 95%CI 3.88–10.90), worsened relationships with friends during compared to pre-pandemic (OR 4.04, 95%CI 2.59–6.35), and stress related to school closures during the COVID-19 pandemic (OR 3.15, 95%CI 2.14–4.67; Table 3).

Discussion

We conducted a nationally representative survey to collect self-report data on mental health symptoms from diverse children and youth in Canada. This study builds on existing cross-sectional evidence by demonstrating that over one-third of children and youth in our sample self-reported symptoms of worsened mental health during compared to pre-COVID-19 pandemic. Children and youth who reported experiencing changes in familial relationships or relationships with friends or were stressed regarding school closures were more likely to self-report symptoms of worsened mental health. The data highlights the importance of psychosocial interventions grounded in familial relationships that includes strategies to support mental health as well as broader existential concerns and uncertainties regarding personal goals and agency. Our findings overall identify potential social factors that could serve as opportunities for intervention.

Our analyses revealed consistent links between family relationships and child and youth mental health. Family systems research emphasizes the importance of supportive and nurturing parenting for child and youth emotional states [33, 34]. Child/youth-parent conflict is reported to decrease when children and youth use parental social supports in times of crisis [35, 36]. Grounded and stable parental warmth may, therefore act as a protective factor against negative affect and distress among children and youth that arise from curtailed family functioning [37, 38]. Accessible approaches targeting the interparental relationship (with or without a direct parenting focus) can significantly improve couple communication, relationship satisfaction, parenting quality and comprehensiveness, and adult mental health, with associated improved outcomes for child and youth mental health in the family [39,40,41,42,43]. When considering interventions to recover from the COVID-19 pandemic and prevention strategies to prepare for future public health crises, targeting the entire family unit may have instrumental downstream impacts on child and youth mental health [44].

The available literature indicates that not all families were impacted similarly by social disruptions caused by the COVID-19 pandemic [45]. For example, mothers [46], members of racialized groups [47], financially insecure families [48], and those with preexisting mental and/or physical health conditions or belonging to sexually marginalized groups [49], experienced heightened stress due to public health measures to contain COVID-19 [50]. While families who experienced more cumulative stress pre- and/or during the COVID-19 pandemic were more likely to experience worsened mental health outcomes, it is important to consider that risk is a probabilistic—not deterministic— process [51, 52]. Specifically, risk operates in tandem with promotive (that place family members on a trajectory toward positive development and functioning regardless of risk level [53, 54]) and protective (for positive adaptation and functioning when risk or adversity is heightened, over and above any effects at lower risk levels [55]) factors. The mental health effects of the pandemic on families depended primarily on child/youth developmental stages, the type and severity of challenges experienced, preexisting vulnerabilities and strengths, availability (or lack) of resources, and mobilization of protective systems that foster resilience [56].

The COVID-19 pandemic highlighted globally the integral role of educators in child and youth day-to-day lives and wellbeing [57,58,59]. Personalized parental training that focuses on problem solving and strengthening families within the education system may be a broad and effective intervention for individualized child and youth mental health [60, 61]. Governmental investments and involvement from Ministers of Education to develop and test interventions focused on strengthening the family environment is an attractive approach to educate parents on optimal family functioning strategies [62, 63]. Potential interventions may include key collaborative “check points” among parents and teachers on plans for providing accessible mental health resources to children or youth displaying early signs of mental health challenges [64, 65].

Our data highlights that changes to friend groups and connectedness in the COVID-19 pandemic was an unintended consequence of disease containment measures that were particularly problematic for children and youth [66,67,68] who often rely on their peer group for personal identity and support during early developmental stages [69, 70]. The propensity to lose connectedness may have exacerbated some of the mental health impacts of disease containment measures [71]. Losing links to friends and feeling excluded can result in a worsened mood [72]. Social anxiety—triggered by a perceived threat to social relationships or status—is also strongly associated with connectedness [73, 74]. Clinically, particularly in periods of substantial social disruption, it is important to encourage parents to establish and maintain structured routines centered on inclusive group activities (virtually, or otherwise) and involving children and youth in creating family social events that foster healthy connection [75, 76]. For a better understanding of the duration, intensity and nature (e.g., peer-related vs. parent-related) of connectedness, measures such as The Social Connectedness Scale or the Social Assurance Scale should be used in the future when evaluating the experiences of children and youth [77].

Limitations

Our findings highlight the complexity of the relationships between social factors and child and youth mental health symptoms during the COVID-19 pandemic within the context of a high-income country. Research on impacts among low- and middle-income countries has showed comparably elevated prevalence of worsened mental health symptoms, augmented by social, economic and cultural factors, particularly poor access to mental health support [78]. Future research should focus on provision of appropriate mental health support to address systemic inequalities and social determinants to meet child and youth mental health needs in these regions of the world. Further, our data were collected from a large and representative sample of the Canadian population in a cross-sectional survey. However, our results have limited longitudinal applicability; we queried children and youth to self-report retrospectively on perceived changes in mental health symptoms throughout the COVID-19 pandemic and cannot generalize our findings to any additional evolution in mental health symptoms that may have occurred in the post-pandemic period. Additional research that uses longitudinal designs with ideally more than three time points are needed to assess nonlinear change and developmental cascades among children and youth. As age was not one of our a priori defined social factors, we did not seek to understand the association of age with mental health outcomes, despite that age plays as much of a role in psychopathology compared to social and genetic factors. Future studies on this topic should seek to better understand the moderating role of age on mental health outcomes during public health crises. Our survey was deployed online in English and French—Canada’s two official languages—and excluded children and youth without internet access or those who read and write exclusively in other languages (~ 9% and ~ 2% of the Canadian population, respectively) [79]. Utilizing a volunteer panel (Leger’s LEO panel) to recruit children and youth for compensation may also have introduced recruitment bias. The majority of our sample was White, primarily from Central Canada (including Ontario and Quebec); thus, our results should be generalized with caution to children and youth of diverse ethnic backgrounds or those residing in other Canadian provinces.

Conclusions

Many children and youth experienced symptoms of worsened mental health during the COVID-19 pandemic that were related to social factors, including changes to relationships with family and friends and stress related to school closures. We provide self-report data from a nationally representative sample of children and youth that highlights complex pathways linking social factors with child and youth mental health in the COVID-19 pandemic. When considering interventions to recover from the COVID-19 pandemic and prevention strategies to prepare for future public health crises, targeting child and youth familial relationships may positive impacts on child and youth mental health.

Availability of data and materials

The data are not publicly available due to containing semi-identifiable information that could compromise participant privacy. Additional summary tables are available from the corresponding author upon request.

References

  1. Detsky AS, Bogoch II. COVID-19 in Canada: experience and response. JAMA. 2020;324(8):743–4. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2020.14033.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Racine N, McArthur BA, Cooke JE, et al. Global prevalence of depressive and anxiety symptoms in children and adolescents during COVID-19: a meta-analysis. JAMA Pediatr. 2021;175(11):1142–50. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamapediatrics.2021.2482.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Giannotti M, Mazzoni N, Bentenuto A, et al. Family adjustment to COVID-19 lockdown in Italy: Parental stress, coparenting, and child externalizing behavior. Fam Process. 2022;61(2):745–63. https://doi.org/10.1111/famp.12686.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Viner R, Russell S, Saulle R, et al. School closures during social lockdown and mental health, health behaviors, and well-being among children and adolescents during the first COVID-19 wave: a systematic review. JAMA Pediatr. 2022;176(4):400–9. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamapediatrics.2021.5840.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Osgood K, Shelden-Dean H, Kimball H. The Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Children’s Mental Health What We Know So Far: Child Mind Institute. 2021.

    Google Scholar 

  6. He M, Cabrera N, Renteria J, et al. Family functioning in the time of COVID-19 among economically vulnerable families: risks and protective factors. Front Psychol. 2021;12:730447. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.730447.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Hibel LC, Boyer CJ, Buhler-Wassmann AC, et al. Deviations in stress and support: Associations with parenting emotions across the COVID-19 pandemic. J Fam Psychol. 2023;37(7):1072–82. https://doi.org/10.1037/fam0001138.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Roos LE, Salisbury M, Penner-Goeke L, et al. Supporting families to protect child health: Parenting quality and household needs during the COVID-19 pandemic. PLoS One. 2021;16(5):e0251720. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0251720.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Russell BS, Hutchison M, Tambling R, et al. Initial challenges of caregiving during COVID-19: caregiver burden, mental health, and the parent-child relationship. Child Psychiatry Hum Dev. 2020;51(5):671–82. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10578-020-01037-x.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. Imran N, Aamer I, Sharif MI, et al. Psychological burden of quarantine in children and adolescents: A rapid systematic review and proposed solutions. Pak J Med Sci. 2020;36(5):1106–16. https://doi.org/10.12669/pjms.36.5.3088.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. MacKinnon AL, Silang K, Penner K, et al. Promoting mental health in parents of young children using eHealth interventions: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Child Fam Psychol Rev. 2022;25(3):413–34. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10567-022-00385-5.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. Ko CH, Yen CF, Yen JY, et al. Psychosocial impact among the public of the severe acute respiratory syndrome epidemic in Taiwan. Psychiatry Clin Neurosci. 2006;60(4):397–403.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Main A, Zhou Q, Ma Y, et al. Relations of SARS-related stressors and coping to Chinese college students’ psychological adjustment during the 2003 Beijing SARS epidemic. J Couns Psychol. 2011;58(3):410.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Sprang G, Silman M. Posttraumatic stress disorder in parents and youth after health-related disasters. Disaster Med Public Health Prep. 2013;7(1):105–10.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Golberstein E, Gonzales G, Meara E. How do economic downturns affect the mental health of children? Evidence from the National Health Interview Survey. Health Econ. 2019;28(8):955–70.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Kalil A. Effects of the great recession on child development. Ann Am Acad Pol Soc Sci. 2013;650(1):232–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Motti-Stefanidi F, Asendorpf JB. Adaptation during a great economic recession: A cohort study of Greek and immigrant youth. Child Dev. 2017;88(4):1139–55.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Lateef R, Alaggia R, Collin-Vézina D. A scoping review on psychosocial consequences of pandemics on parents and children: Planning for today and the future. Child Youth Serv Rev. 2021;125:106002.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. Feinberg ME, Mogle JA, Lee JK, et al. Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on parent, child, and family functioning. Family Process. 2022;61(1):361–74. https://doi.org/10.1111/famp.12649.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Leigh JP, Moss SJ, Sriskandarajah C, et al. A muti-informant national survey on the impact of COVID-19 on mental health symptoms of parent–child dyads in Canada. Sci Rep. 2023;13(1):7972. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-34544-7.

    Article  ADS  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. COVID-19 epidemiology update: Statistics Canada. https://health-infobase.canada.ca/covid-19/.

  22. Table 17–10–0005–01 Population estimates on July 1st, by age and sex: Statistics Canada. https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/t1/tbl1/en/tv.action?pid=1710000501.

  23. Age Standards: Statistics Canada. https://www23.statcan.gc.ca/imdb/p3VD.pl?Function=getVD&TVD=252430.

  24. Eysenbach G. Improving the quality of Web surveys: the Checklist for Reporting Results of Internet E-Surveys (CHERRIES). J Med Internet Res. 2004;6(3):e34–e34. https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.6.3.e34.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  25. Moss SJ, Lorenzetti DL, FitzGerald EA, et al. Strategies to mitigate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on child and youth well-being: a scoping review protocol. BMJ Open. 2022;12(7):e062413. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2022-062413.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Moss SJ, Mizen SJ, Stelfox M, Brundin Mather R, FitzGerald EA, Tutelman P, Raccine N, Birnie KA, Fiest KM, Stelfox HT, Parsons Leigh J. Interventions to Improve Wellbeing among Children and Youth During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Systematic Review. BMC Medicine. 2023;(In Press).

  27. Ross DA, Hinton R, Melles-Brewer M, et al. Adolescent Well-Being: A Definition and Conceptual Framework. J Adolesc Health. 2020;67(4):472–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jadohealth.2020.06.042. [publishedOnlineFirst:2020/08/13].

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  28. Nikolaidis A, Paksarian D, Alexander L, et al. The Coronavirus Health and Impact Survey (CRISIS) reveals reproducible correlates of pandemic-related mood states across the Atlantic. Sci Rep. 2021;11(1):8139. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-87270-3. [publishedOnlineFirst:20210414].

    Article  ADS  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  29. Burns KE, Duffett M, Kho ME, et al. A guide for the design and conduct of self-administered surveys of clinicians. CMAJ. 2008;179(3):245–52. https://doi.org/10.1503/cmaj.080372. [publishedOnlineFirst:2008/07/30].

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  30. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing. Vienna, Austria: R Core Team; 2022.

  31. Strategy for Patient-Oriented Research- Patient Engagement Framework 2019. Canadian Institutes of Health Research; 2019. Canada.

  32. Staniszewska S, Brett J, Simera I, et al. GRIPP2 reporting checklists: tools to improve reporting of patient and public involvement in research. BMJ. 2017;358:j3453. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.j3453.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  33. Berger LM, Font SA. The role of the family and family-centered programs and policies. Future Child. 2015;25(1):155–76.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  34. Robin AL, Foster SL. Negotiating parent-adolescent conflict: A behavioral-family systems approach. Guilford Press; 2002.

  35. Zeman J, Cassano M, Perry-Parrish C, et al. Emotion regulation in children and adolescents. J Dev Behav Pediatr. 2006;27(2):155–68.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Armstrong MI, Birnie-Lefcovitch S, Ungar MT. Pathways between social support, family well being, quality of parenting, and child resilience: What we know. J Child Fam Stud. 2005;14:269–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Ginsburg KR, Committee on Psychosocial Aspects of Child and Family Health. The importance of play in promoting healthy child development and maintaining strong parent-child bonds. Pediatrics. 2007;119(1):182–91.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Walsh F. Normal family processes. New York: Guilford Press; 1982.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Cowan PA, Cowan CP, Ablow JC, et al. The family context of parenting in children's adaptation to elementary school. Routledge; 2005.

  40. Cummings EM, Faircloth WB, Mitchell PM, et al. Evaluating a brief prevention program for improving marital conflict in community families. J Fam Psychol. 2008;22(2):193.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Beach SR, Barton AW, Lei MK, et al. The effect of communication change on long-term reductions in child exposure to conflict: Impact of the promoting strong African American families (Pro SAAF) program. Fam Process. 2014;53(4):580–95.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  42. Cookston JT, Braver SL, Griffin WA, et al. Effects of the dads for life intervention on interparental conflict and coparenting in the two years after divorce. Fam Process. 2007;46(1):123–37.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Pruett MK, Insabella GM, Gustafson K. The Collaborative Divorce Project: a court-based intervention for separating parents with young children. Fam Court Rev. 2005;43(1):38–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Prime H, Wade M, Browne DT. Risk and resilience in family well-being during the COVID-19 pandemic. Am Psychol. 2020;75(5):631–43. https://doi.org/10.1037/amp0000660.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Masten AS, Motti-Stefanidi F. Multisystem resilience for children and youth in disaster: reflections in the context of COVID-19. Advers Resil Sci. 2020;1(2):95–106. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42844-020-00010-w. [publishedOnlineFirst:20200625].

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  46. Yavorsky JE, Qian Y, Sargent AC. The gendered pandemic: The implications of COVID-19 for work and family. Sociol Compass. 2021;15(6):e12881. https://doi.org/10.1111/soc4.12881.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  47. Le K, Nguyen M. The psychological consequences of COVID-19 lockdowns. The Political Economy of Covid-19. Routledge; 2022. p. 39–55.

  48. Zheng J, Morstead T, Sin N, et al. Psychological distress in North America during COVID-19: The role of pandemic-related stressors. Soc Sci Med. 2021;270:113687.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  49. Gibson B, Schneider J, Talamonti D, et al. The impact of inequality on mental health outcomes during the COVID-19 pandemic: A systematic review. Can Psychol. 2021;62(1):101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Dudovitz RN, Thomas K, Shah MD, et al. School-age children’s wellbeing and school-related needs during the COVID-19 pandemic. Acad Pediatr. 2022;22(8):1368–74.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  51. Juster RP, Seeman T, McEwen BS, et al. Social inequalities and the road to allostatic load: From vulnerability to resilience. Dev Psychopathol. 2016:1–54.

  52. Masten AS. Invited commentary: Resilience and positive youth development frameworks in developmental science. Springer; 2014. p. 1018–24.

  53. Masten AS, Cicchetti D. Resilience in development: Progress and transformation. Dev Psychopathol. 2016;4(3):271–333.

    Google Scholar 

  54. Rutter M. Resilience: Causal pathways and social ecology. The social ecology of resilience: A handbook of theory and practice. Springer; 2011. p. 33–42.

  55. Wright MOD, Masten AS, Narayan AJ. Resilience processes in development: Four waves of research on positive adaptation in the context of adversity. Handbook of resilience in children. Springer; 2012. p. 15–37.

  56. Masten AS. Family risk and resilience in the context of cascading COVID-19 challenges: Commentary on the special issue. Dev Psychol. 2021;57(10):1748.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Darling-Hammond L, Hyler ME. Preparing educators for the time of COVID… and beyond. Eur J Teach Educ. 2020;43(4):457–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Almazova N, Krylova E, Rubtsova A, et al. Challenges and opportunities for Russian higher education amid COVID-19: Teachers’ perspective. Education Sciences. 2020;10(12):368.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Alves R, Lopes T, Precioso J. Teachers’ well-being in times of Covid-19 pandemic: factors that explain professional well-being. IJERI. 2021;15:203–17.

    Google Scholar 

  60. Walsh F. Strengthening family resilience. Guilford publications; 2015.

  61. Sanders MR. Triple P-positive parenting program: A population approach to promoting competent parenting. AeJAMH. 2003;2(3):127–43.

    Google Scholar 

  62. Eccles JS, Harold RD. Parent-school involvement during the early adolescent years. Teach Coll Rec. 1993;94(3):568–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  63. Christenson SL. The family-school partnership: An opportunity to promote the learning competence of all students. Sch Psychol Rev. 2004;33(1):83–104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  64. LaRocque M, Kleiman I, Darling SM. Parental involvement: The missing link in school achievement. Prev Sch Fail. 2011;55(3):115–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  65. Sheridan SM, Bovaird JA, Glover TA, et al. A randomized trial examining the effects of conjoint behavioral consultation and the mediating role of the parent–teacher relationship. Sch Psychol Rev. 2012;41(1):23–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  66. Perkins KN, Carey K, Lincoln E, et al. School connectedness still matters: The association of school connectedness and mental health during remote learning due to COVID-19. J Primary Prevent. 2021;42:641–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  67. Widnall E, Winstone L, Plackett R, et al. Impact of school and peer connectedness on adolescent mental health and well-being outcomes during the COVID-19 pandemic: a longitudinal panel survey. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022;19(11):6768.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  68. Hutchinson EA, Sequeira SL, Silk JS, et al. Peer connectedness and pre-existing social reward processing predicts US adolescent girls’ suicidal ideation during COVID-19. J Res Adolesc. 2021;31(3):703–16.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  69. Ragelienė T. Links of adolescents identity development and relationship with peers: a systematic literature review. J Can Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2016;25(2):97–105 [published Online First: 20160501].

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  70. Tarrant M. Adolescent peer groups and social identity. Soc Dev. 2002;11(1):110–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  71. Ellis WE, Dumas TM, Forbes LM. Physically isolated but socially connected: Psychological adjustment and stress among adolescents during the initial COVID-19 crisis. Can J Behav Sci. 2020;52(3):177.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  72. Beck AT, Clark DA. Anxiety and depression: An information processing perspective. Anxiety and self-focused attention. Routledge; 2015. p. 41–54.

  73. Fatima M, Niazi S, Ghayas S. Relationship between self-esteem and social anxiety: Role of social connectedness as a mediator. PJSCP. 2017;15(2):12–7.

    Google Scholar 

  74. Van Zalk N, Van Zalk M. The importance of perceived care and connectedness with friends and parents for adolescent social anxiety. J Pers. 2015;83(3):346–60.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  75. Fraser E, Pakenham KI. Resilience in children of parents with mental illness: Relations between mental health literacy, social connectedness and coping, and both adjustment and caregiving. Psychol Health Med. 2009;14(5):573–84.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  76. Nitschke JP, Forbes PA, Ali N, et al. Resilience during uncertainty? Greater social connectedness during COVID-19 lockdown is associated with reduced distress and fatigue. Br J Health Psychol. 2021;26(2):553–69.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  77. Lee RM, Robbins SB. Measuring belongingness: The social connectedness and the social assurance scales. J Couns Psychol. 1995;42(2):232.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  78. Kola L, Kohrt BA, Hanlon C, et al. COVID-19 mental health impact and responses in low-income and middle-income countries: reimagining global mental health. The Lancet Psychiatry. 2021;8(6):535–50.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  79. Census Profile, 2016 Census: Statistics Canada. https://www12.statcan.gc.ca/census-recensement/2016/dp-pd/prof/index.cfm?Lang=E.

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors have no acknowledgments.

Funding

Dr. Parsons Leigh obtained funding for this work from the Canadian Institutes for Health Research (CIHR) (#177722). Dr. Moss was supported by a CIHR Banting Postdoctoral Fellowship.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Health, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS, Canada

    Stephana Julia Moss, Maia Stelfox, Cynthia Sriskandarajah, Laura Leppan, Angie Nickel, Kristine Russell, May Solis & Jeanna Parsons Leigh

  2. London Health Sciences Centre, London, ON, UK

    Eric McArthur

  3. Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada

    Sofia B. Ahmed

  4. Departments of Anesthesiology, Perioperative, and Pain Medicine, Calgary, AB, Canada

    Kathryn Birnie

  5. Rankin School of Nursing, St. Francis Xavier University, Antigonish, NS, Canada

    Donna M. Halperin

  6. Canadian Center for Vaccinology, Departments of Pediatrics and Microbiology & Immunology, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS, Canada

    Scott A. Halperin

  7. Frayme, Cornwall, ON, Canada

    Micaela Harley

  8. Department of Community Health Sciences, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada

    Kathryn Birnie & Jia Hu

  9. Department of Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA

    Josh Ng Kamstra

  10. Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Ottawa, Children’s Hospital of Eastern Ontario Research Institute, Ottawa, ON, Canada

    Nicole Racine

  11. Young Canadian Roundtable On Health, Toronto, ON, Canada

    Stacie Smith

  12. Department of Oncology, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada

    Perri R. Tutelman

  13. Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada

    Henry T. Stelfox

  14. Department of Critical Care Medicine and O’Brien Institute for Public Health, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada

    Kirsten M. Fiest

Authors
  1. Stephana Julia Moss
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Maia Stelfox
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Eric McArthur
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Cynthia Sriskandarajah
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Sofia B. Ahmed
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Kathryn Birnie
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Donna M. Halperin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Scott A. Halperin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Micaela Harley
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Jia Hu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  11. Josh Ng Kamstra
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  12. Laura Leppan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  13. Angie Nickel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  14. Nicole Racine
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  15. Kristine Russell
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  16. Stacie Smith
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  17. May Solis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  18. Perri R. Tutelman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  19. Henry T. Stelfox
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  20. Kirsten M. Fiest
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  21. Jeanna Parsons Leigh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

All those designated as authors (JPL, SJM, MS, CS, EM, SBA, KB, DMH, SAH, MH, JH, JNK, LL, AN, NR, KR, SS, MS, PRT, HTS, KMF) have met all ICMJE criteria for authorship.Dr. Parsons Leigh conceptualized the study, collected the data, conducted formal analysis, provided resources and supervision, wrote the original draft and edited subsequent drafts. Dr. Moss conceptualized the study, collected the data, conducted formal analysis, wrote the original draft and edited subsequent drafts. Ms. Stelfox conducted formal analysis, wrote the original draft and edited subsequent drafts.Dr. McArthur conducted formal analysis, wrote the original draft, and edited subsequent drafts. Ms. Sriskandarajah conducted formal analysis, and edited subsequent drafts. Dr. Ahmed conceptualized the study, and edited subsequent drafts. Dr. Birnie edited subsequent drafts. Dr. Halperin conceptualized the study and edited subsequent drafts. Dr. S Halperin conceptualized the study and edited subsequent drafts. Ms. Harley edited subsequent drafts. Dr. Hu edited subsequent drafts. Dr. Ng Kamstra edited subsequent drafts. Ms. Leppan edited subsequent drafts. Ms. Nickel edited subsequent drafts. Dr. Racine wrote the original draft and edited subsequent drafts. Ms. Russell edited subsequent drafts. Ms. Smith edited subsequent drafts. Ms. Solis edited subsequent drafts. Dr. Tutelman conceptualized the study, wrote the original draft, and edited subsequent drafts. Dr. Stelfox conceptualized the study, provided supervision, and edited subsequent drafts. Dr. Fiest provided resources and supervision, wrote the original draft, and edited subsequent drafts. JPL, SJM, CS, and MS made substantial contributions to the conception and design of the work and drafted the work, approved the submitted version, and agreed both to be personally accountable for each author’s own contributions and to ensure that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work, even ones in which the author was not personally involved, are appropriate investigated, resolved, and the resolution documented in the literature.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jeanna Parsons Leigh.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

All participants provided electronic informed consent on their own behalf; as the parent had significant knowledge of their child/youth, prior to submitting their own consent, the parent attested that they understood the information regarding their child/youth’s participation and that their child/youth had the capacity to consent on their own behalf. This study was approved by the University of Calgary’s Conjoint Health Research Ethics Board (#21–2013) and the Research Ethics Board at Dalhousie University (#2021–5947); all methods were carried out according to research ethics board guidelines and regulations.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Moss, S.J., Stelfox, M., McArthur, E. et al. Social factors associated with self-reported changes in mental health symptoms among youth in the COVID-19 pandemic: a cross-sectional survey. BMC Public Health 24, 631 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-024-18087-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-024-18087-8

Keywords

BMC Public Health

ISSN: 1471-2458

Contact us