ABSTRACT
Understanding how different Black and other racially minoritised communities thrive is an emerging priority area in mental health promotion. Literature demonstrates health benefits of social capital (social resources embedded within social networks). However, its effects are not always positive, particularly for certain subpopulations who are already disadvantaged.The CONtributions of social NEtworks to Community Thriving (CONNECT) study will use Participatory Action Research (PAR) to investigate social capital as a resource that benefits (or hinders) racially minoritised communities and their mental health. The CONNECT study was designed within a partnership with community organisations and responds to local policy in two South-East London Boroughs, thereby providing potential channels for the action component of PAR. Taking an anti-racism lens, we acknowledge the underpinning role of racism in creating health inequities. We apply an intersectional framework to be considerate of overlapping forms of oppression such as age, gender, socioeconomic status, and sexual orientation as an essential part of developing effective strategies to tackle health inequities. Key components of this mixed methods PAR study include (1) involving racialised minority community members as peer researchers in the team (2) collecting and analysing primary qualitative data via interviews, photovoice, and community mapping workshops, (3) developing relevant research questions guided by peer researchers and collaborating organisations and analysing secondary quantitative data accordingly, (4) integrating qualitative and quantitative phases, and (5) working closely with community and policy partners to act on our findings and use our research for social change.The PAR approach will allow us to engage community (voluntary sector and government) and academic partners in decision making and help address imbalances in power and resource allocation. Knowledge generated through this collaborative approach will contribute to existing community initiatives, policies, and council strategies. This will ensure the views and experiences of racially minoritised communities drive the changes we are collaboratively committed to achieving.
Subject(s)
Social Capital , Humans , Male , Female , Health Services Research , Health Promotion/methods , Population Groups , United KingdomABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Adolescence is a critical period for social and emotional development. We sought to examine the impacts of Covid-19 and related social restrictions and school closures on adolescent mental health, particularly among disadvantaged, marginalised, and vulnerable groups. METHODS: We analysed four waves of data - 3 pre-Covid-19 (2016-2019) and 1 mid-Covid-19 (May-Aug 2020; n, 1074; 12-18 years old, >80% minority ethnic groups, 25% free school meals) from REACH (Resilience, Ethnicity, and AdolesCent Mental Health), an adolescent cohort based in inner-London, United Kingdom. Mental health was assessed using validated measures at each time point. We estimated temporal trends in mental distress and examined variations in changes in distress, pre- to mid-Covid-19, by social group, and by pre- and mid-pandemic risks. RESULTS: We found no evidence of an overall increase in mental distress midpandemic (15.9%, 95% CI: 13.0, 19.4) compared with prepandemic (around 18%). However, there were variations in changes in mental distress by subgroups. There were modest variations by social group and by pre-Covid risks (e.g., a small increase in distress among girls (b [unstandardised beta coefficient] 0.42 [-0.19, 1.03]); a small decrease among boys (b - 0.59 [-1.37, 0.19]); p for interaction .007). The most notable variations were by midpandemic risks: that is, broadly, increases in distress among those reporting negative circumstances and impacts (e.g., in finances, housing, social support and relationships, and daily routines) and decreases in distress among those reporting positive impacts. CONCLUSIONS: We found strong evidence that mental distress increased among young people who were most negatively impacted by Covid-19 and by related social restrictions during the first lockdown in the United Kingdom.
