Background: The effects of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) on the population's mental health and well-being are likely to be profound and long lasting.Aims: To investigate the trajectory of mental health and well-being during the first 6 weeks of lockdown in adults in the UK.Method: A quota survey design and a sampling frame that permitted recruitment of a national sample was employed. Findings for waves 1 (31 March to 9 April 2020), 2 (10 April to 27 April 2020) and 3 (28 April to 11 May 2020) are reported here. A range of mental health factors was assessed: pre-existing mental health problems, suicide attempts and self-harm, suicidal ideation, depression, anxiety, defeat, entrapment, mental well-being and loneliness.Results: A total of 3077 adults in the UK completed the survey at wave 1. Suicidal ideation increased over time. Symptoms of anxiety, and levels of defeat and entrapment decreased across waves whereas levels of depressive symptoms did not change significantly. Positive well-being also increased. Levels of loneliness did not change significantly over waves. Subgroup analyses showed that women, young people (18–29 years), those from more socially disadvantaged backgrounds and those with pre-existing mental health problems have worse mental health outcomes during the pandemic across most factors.Conclusions: The mental health and well-being of the UK adult population appears to have been affected in the initial phase of the COVID-19 pandemic. The increasing rates of suicidal thoughts across waves, especially among young adults, are concerning.

The cumulative science linking stress to negative health outcomes is vast. Stress can affect health directly, through autonomic and neuroendocrine responses, but also indirectly, through changes in health behaviors. In this review, we present a brief overview of ( a) why we should be interested in stress in the context of health; ( b) the stress response and allostatic load; ( c) some of the key biological mechanisms through which stress impacts health, such as by influencing hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis regulation and cortisol dynamics, the autonomic nervous system, and gene expression; and ( d) evidence of the clinical relevance of stress, exemplified through the risk of infectious diseases. The studies reviewed in this article confirm that stress has an impact on multiple biological systems. Future work ought to consider further the importance of early-life adversity and continue to explore how different biological systems interact in the context of stress and health processes.

Stress leads to detrimental health outcomes through direct biological and indirect behavioural changes. Stress can lead to disruption to normal eating behaviours, although the strength of these associations is unknown. This is the first meta-analysis to determine the strength of the stress-eating relationship in healthy adults and to explore the impact of potential moderators. Studies included had a clearly defined measure of stress (i.e., any noxious event or episode in one’s environment with the exclusion of emotional distress) that was linked to non-disordered eating. Key terms were searched in Medline, PsycInfo and Ovid databases (23,104 studies identified). 54 studies (combined N = 119,820) were retained in the meta-analysis. A small, positive effect size was found for the stress-overall food intake relationship (Hedges’ g = 0.114). Stress was associated with increased consumption of unhealthy foods (Hedges’ g = 0.116) but decreased consumption of healthy foods (Hedges’ g = -0.111). Only one significant moderator (restraint on stress-unhealthy eating) was identified. This meta-analysis identified the magnitude of the effect of stress on eating behaviour outcomes. Significant heterogeneity was observed that was not explained by the moderators examined. Further research on moderators of the stress-eating relationship is required and should distinguish effects for healthy versus unhealthy eating.

It is well established that stress is linked to changes in eating behaviors. Research using adult populations has shown that stress is associated with both increases and decreases in the amount and type of food consumed. However, due to a lack of research reviews, the relationship between stress and eating behaviors in children is unclear. This systematic research review and meta-analysis aimed to identify whether stress is associated with healthy and unhealthy eating behaviors in children aged 8-18 years. Studies were included in the review if they measured stress and included a measure of food consumption. All unique studies retrieved (N = 28,070) were assessed for their eligibility at title, abstract and full text levels. A total of 13 studies were included in the final review and data were analysed using Comprehensive Meta-Analysis. Using random-effects modelling, overall stress was not associated with a change in overall eating behaviors. However, additional analyses indicated stress was associated with unhealthy eating behaviors in both younger (Hedge's g = 0.283, p < 0.001) and older (Hedge's g = 0.274, p = 0.001) children. In contrast, stress was not associated with healthy eating behaviors in younger children (Hedge's g = 0.093, p = 0.156), but was negatively associated with healthy eating behaviors in older children (Hedge's g = -0.384, p < 0.001). The current findings are concerning as they suggest the impact of stress on unhealthy eating may begin as early as 8 or 9 years old. Future research ought to investigate further the role of psychological, behavioral and endocrine factors in the development of stress-related eating in children.

The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus‐2 (SARS‐CoV‐2) that has caused the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) pandemic represents the greatest international biopsychosocial emergency the world has faced for a century, and psychological science has an integral role to offer in helping societies recover. The aim of this paper is to set out the shorter‐ and longer‐term priorities for research in psychological science that will (a) frame the breadth and scope of potential contributions from across the discipline; (b) enable researchers to focus their resources on gaps in knowledge; and (c) help funders and policymakers make informed decisions about future research priorities in order to best meet the needs of societies as they emerge from the acute phase of the pandemic. The research priorities were informed by an expert panel convened by the British Psychological Society that reflects the breadth of the discipline; a wider advisory panel with international input; and a survey of 539 psychological scientists conducted early in May 2020. The most pressing need is to research the negative biopsychosocial impacts of the COVID‐19 pandemic to facilitate immediate and longer‐term recovery, not only in relation to mental health, but also in relation to behaviour change and adherence, work, education, children and families, physical health and the brain, and social cohesion and connectedness. We call on psychological scientists to work collaboratively with other scientists and stakeholders, establish consortia, and develop innovative research methods while maintaining high‐quality, open, and rigorous research standards.

Suicide is a major cause of death worldwide, responsible for 1.5% of all mortality. The causes of suicidal behavior are not fully understood. Dysregulated hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis activity, as measured by cortisol levels, is one potential risk factor. This meta-analytic review aimed (i) to estimate the strength and variability of the association between naturally fluctuating cortisol levels and suicidal behavior and (ii) to identify moderators of this relationship. A systematic literature search identified 27 studies (N=2226; 779 suicide attempters and 1447 non-attempters) that met the study eligibility criteria from a total of 417 unique records initially examined. Estimates of effect sizes (r) obtained from these studies were analysed using Comprehensive Meta-Analysis. In these analyses, we compared participants identified as having a past history of suicide attempt(s) to those with no such history. Study quality, mean age of sample and percentage of male participants were examined as potential moderators. Overall, there was no significant effect of suicide group on cortisol. However, significant associations between cortisol and suicide attempts were observed as a function of age. In studies where the mean age of the sample was below 40 years the association was positive (i.e., higher cortisol was associated with suicide attempts; r=.234, p<.001), and where the mean age was 40 or above the association was negative (i.e., lower cortisol was associated with suicide attempts; r=-.129, p<.001). These findings confirm that HPA axis activity, as indicated by age-dependent variations in cortisol levels, is associated with suicidal behavior. The challenge for theory and clinical practice is to explain the complete reversal of the association with age and to identify its clinical implications.