What set some young adults apart during the COVID-19 pandemic? Mental health trajectories, risk and protective factors in an Australian longitudinal study.

OBJECTIVE: Evidence suggests that young adults (aged 18-34) were disproportionately impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic, but little is known about their longer-term mental health changes beyond the early pandemic period. This article investigates heterogeneous trajectories of mental health among Australian young adults across 2 years of the pandemic and identifies a broad range of associated risk and protective factors. METHOD: Young adults (N = 653, Mage = 27.8 years) from the longitudinal Alone Together Study were surveyed biannually between July 2020 and June 2022. Measures assessed anxiety (7-item Generalised Anxiety Disorder scale) and depression (9-item Patient Health Questionnaire) symptoms at Waves 1-4, as well as demographic, psychological, adversity and COVID-19 factors at baseline. RESULTS: Four and three distinct trajectories of anxiety and depressive symptoms, respectively, were identified through growth mixture modelling. The proportion of participants in each anxiety trajectory were Asymptomatic (45.9%), Mild Stable (17.9%), Moderate-Severe Stable (31.1%) and Initially Severe/Recovering (5.1%). For depression, Mild Stable (58.3%), Moderate-Severe Stable (30.5%) and Reactive/Recovering (11.2%). Baseline factors associated with severe symptom trajectories included a lifetime mental health disorder, pre-pandemic stressful events, identifying as LGBTQIA+ and/or female, and experiencing one or more infection-control measures. Higher household income was protective. CONCLUSION: Most young adults demonstrated stable trajectories of low or high symptoms during the pandemic, with smaller groups showing initially severe or reactive symptoms followed by marked improvements over time. Vulnerable subgroups (gender- or sexuality-diverse, those with prior adversity or pre-existing mental ill-health) may face ongoing impacts and require targeted psychosocial supports to assist their mental health recovery post-COVID-19 and in the event of future crises.

A hidden pandemic? An umbrella review of global evidence on mental health in the time of COVID-19.

Background: The mental health impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic remain a public health concern. High quality synthesis of extensive global literature is needed to quantify this impact and identify factors associated with adverse outcomes. Methods: We conducted a rigorous umbrella review with meta-review and present (a) pooled prevalence of probable depression, anxiety, stress, psychological distress, and post-traumatic stress, (b) standardised mean difference in probable depression and anxiety pre-versus-during the pandemic period, and (c) comprehensive narrative synthesis of factors associated with poorer outcomes. Databases searched included Scopus, Embase, PsycINFO, and MEDLINE dated to March 2022. Eligibility criteria included systematic reviews and/or meta-analyses, published post-November 2019, reporting data in English on mental health outcomes during the COVID-19 pandemic. Findings: Three hundred and thirty-eight systematic reviews were included, 158 of which incorporated meta-analyses. Meta-review prevalence of anxiety symptoms ranged from 24.4% (95%CI: 18-31%, I 2: 99.98%) for general populations to 41.1% (95%CI: 23-61%, I 2: 99.65%) in vulnerable populations. Prevalence of depressive symptoms ranged from 22.9% (95%CI: 17-30%, I 2: 99.99%) for general populations to 32.5% (95%CI: 17-52%, I 2: 99.35) in vulnerable populations. Prevalence of stress, psychological distress and PTSD/PTSS symptoms were 39.1% (95%CI: 34-44%; I 2: 99.91%), 44.2% (95%CI: 32-58%; I 2: 99.95%), and 18.8% (95%CI: 15-23%; I 2: 99.87%), respectively. Meta-review comparing pre-COVID-19 to during COVID-19 prevalence of probable depression and probable anxiety revealed standard mean differences of 0.20 (95%CI = 0.07-0.33) and 0.29 (95%CI = 0.12-0.45), respectively. Conclusion: This is the first meta-review to synthesise the longitudinal mental health impacts of the pandemic. Findings show that probable depression and anxiety were significantly higher than pre-COVID-19, and provide some evidence that that adolescents, pregnant and postpartum people, and those hospitalised with COVID-19 experienced heightened adverse mental health. Policymakers can modify future pandemic responses accordingly to mitigate the impact of such measures on public mental health.

Mental health and wellbeing outcomes of youth participation: A scoping review protocol.

There is growing recognition that young people should be given opportunities to participate in the decisions that affect their lives, such as advisory groups, representative councils, advocacy or activism. Positive youth development theory and sociopolitical development theory propose pathways through which youth participation can influence mental health and wellbeing outcomes. However, there is limited empirical research synthesising the impact of participation on youth mental health and/or wellbeing, or the characteristics of activities that are associated with better or worse mental health and/or wellbeing outcomes. This scoping review seeks to address this gap by investigating the scope and nature of evidence detailing how youth participation initiatives can influence mental health and/or wellbeing outcomes for participants. To be eligible, literature must describe youth (aged 15-24) in participation activities and the impact of this engagement on participant mental health and/or wellbeing outcomes. A systematic scoping review of peer-reviewed and grey literature will be conducted using Scopus, PsycINFO, Embase, Medline and grey literature databases. The scoping review will apply established methodology by Arksey and O'Malley, Levac and colleagues and the Joanna Briggs Institute. Title, abstract, and full text screening will be completed by two reviewers, data will be extracted by one reviewer. Findings will be reported in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR), including a qualitative summary of the characteristics of youth participation and their influence on youth mental health outcomes. Youth advisory group members will be invited to deliver governance on the project from the outset; participate in, and contribute to, all stages of the review process; reflect on their own experiences of participation; and co-author the resulting publication. This scoping review will provide essential knowledge on how participation activities can be better designed to maximise beneficial psychosocial outcomes for involved youth.

In their own words: An Australian community sample's priority concerns regarding mental health in the context of COVID-19.

The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in significant and unprecedented mental health impacts in Australia. However, there is a paucity of research directly asking Australian community members about their mental health experiences, and what they perceive to be the most important mental health issues in the context of the pandemic. This study utilises qualitative data from Alone Together, a longitudinal mixed-methods study investigating the effects of COVID-19 on mental health in an Australian community sample (N = 2,056). A total of 1,037 participants, ranging in sex (69.9% female), age (M = 40-49 years), state/territory of residence, and socioeconomic status, shared responses to two open-ended questions in the first follow up survey regarding their mental health experiences and priorities during COVID-19. Responses were analysed using thematic analysis. Participants described COVID-19 as primarily impacting their mental health through the disruption it posed to their social world and financial stability. A key concern for participants who reported having poor mental health was the existence of multiple competing barriers to accessing high quality mental health care. According to participant responses, the pandemic placed additional pressures on an already over-burdened mental health service system, leaving many without timely, appropriate support. Absent or stigmatising rhetoric around mental health, at both a political and community level, also prevented participants from seeking help. Insights gained from the present research provide opportunities for policymakers and health practitioners to draw on the expertise of Australians' lived experience and address priority issues through targeted policy planning. This could ultimately support a more responsive, integrated, and effective mental health system, during and beyond the COVID-19 pandemic.