There is major concern about the impact of the global COVID-19 outbreak on mental health. Several studies suggest that mental health deteriorated in many countries before and during enforced isolation (ie, lockdown), but it remains unknown how mental health has changed week by week over the course of the COVID-19 pandemic. This study aimed to explore the trajectories of anxiety and depression over the 20 weeks after lockdown was announced in England, and compare the growth trajectories by individual characteristics. In this prospective longitudinal observational study, we analysed data from the UCL COVID-19 Social Study, a panel study weighted to population proportions, which collects information on anxiety (using the Generalised Anxiety Disorder assessment) and depressive symptoms (using the Patient Health Questionnaire) weekly in the UK since March 21, 2020. We included data from adults living in England who had at least three repeated measures between March 23 and Aug 9, 2020. Analyses were done using latent growth models, which were fitted to account for sociodemographic and health covariates. Between March 23, and Aug 9, data from over 70 000 adults were collected in the UCL COVID-19 Social Study. When including participants living in England with three follow-up measures and no missing values, our analytic sample consisted of 36 520 participants. The average depression score was 6·6 (SD=6·0, range 0-27) and the average anxiety score 5·7 (SD=5·6, range 0-21) in week 1. Anxiety and depression levels both declined across the first 20 weeks following the introduction of lockdown in England (b=-1·93, SE=0·26, p<0·0001 for anxiety; b=-2·52, SE=0·28, p<0·0001 for depressive symptoms). The fastest decreases were seen across the strict lockdown period (between weeks 2 and 5), with symptoms plateauing as further lockdown easing measures were introduced (between weeks 16 and 20). Being a woman or younger, having lower educational attainment, lower income, or pre-existing mental health conditions, and living alone or with children were all risk factors for higher levels of anxiety and depression at the start of lockdown. Many of these inequalities in experiences were reduced as lockdown continued, but differences were still evident 20 weeks after the start of lockdown. These data suggest that the highest levels of depression and anxiety occurred in the early stages of lockdown but declined fairly rapidly, possibly because individuals adapted to circumstances. Our findings emphasise the importance of supporting individuals in the lead-up to future lockdowns to try to reduce distress, and highlight that groups already at risk for poor mental health before the pandemic have remained at risk throughout lockdown and its aftermath. Nuffield Foundation, UK Research and Innovation, Wellcome Trust.

There are concerns internationally that lockdown measures taken during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic could lead to a rise in loneliness. As loneliness is recognised as a major public health concern, it is therefore vital that research considers the impact of the current COVID-19 pandemic on loneliness to provide necessary support. But it remains unclear, who is lonely in lockdown? This study compared sociodemographic predictors of loneliness before and during the COVID-19 pandemic using cross-cohort analyses of data from UK adults captured before the pandemic (UK Household Longitudinal Study, n = 31,064) and during the pandemic (UCL (University College London) COVID-19 Social Study, n = 60,341). Risk factors for loneliness were near identical before and during the pandemic. Young adults, women, people with lower education or income, the economically inactive, people living alone and urban residents had a higher risk of being lonely. Some people who were already at risk of being lonely (e.g. young adults aged 18–30 years, people with low household income and adults living alone) experienced a heightened risk during the COVID-19 pandemic compared with people living before COVID-19 emerged. Furthermore, being a student emerged as a higher risk factor during lockdown than usual. Findings suggest that interventions to reduce or prevent loneliness during COVID-19 should be targeted at those sociodemographic groups already identified as high risk in previous research. These groups are likely not just to experience loneliness during the pandemic but potentially to have an even higher risk than normal of experiencing loneliness relative to low-risk groups.

There is a large and growing body of evidence on the health benefits of engagement in leisure activities (voluntary, enjoyable non-work activities, such as hobbies, arts, volunteering, community group membership, sports, and socialising). However, there is no unifying framework explaining how leisure activities affect health: what the mechanisms of action are by which engagement with leisure activities leads to the prevention, management, or treatment of mental and physical illness. In this Review, we identify and map over 600 mechanisms of action. These mechanisms can be categorised as psychological, biological, social, and behavioural processes that operate at individual (micro), group (meso), and societal (macro) levels, and are synthesised into a new theoretical framework: the Multi-level Leisure Mechanisms Framework. This framework situates understanding of leisure activities within the theoretical lens of complex adaptive systems and aims to support the design of more theory-driven, cross-disciplinary studies.

There are increasing worries that lockdowns and 'stay-at-home' orders due to the COVID-19 pandemic could lead to a rise in loneliness, which is recognised as a major public health concern. But profiles of loneliness during the pandemic and risk factors remain unclear. The current study aimed to examine if and how loneliness levels changed during the strict lockdown and to explore the clustering of loneliness growth trajectories. Data from 38,217 UK adults in the UCL COVID -19 Social Study (a panel study collecting data weekly during the pandemic) were analysed during the strict lockdown period in the UK (23/03/2020-10/05/2020). The sample was well-stratified and weighted to population proportions of gender, age, ethnicity, education and geographical location. Growth mixture modelling was used to identify the latent classes of loneliness growth trajectories and their predictors. Analyses revealed four classes, with the baseline loneliness level ranging from low to high. In the first a few weeks of lockdown, loneliness levels increased in the highest loneliness group, decreased in the lowest loneliness group, and stayed relatively constant in the middle two groups. Younger adults (OR = 2.17-6.81), women (OR = 1.59), people with low income (OR = 1.3), the economically inactive (OR = 1.3-2.04) and people with mental health conditions (OR = 5.32) were more likely to be in highest loneliness class relative to the lowest. Further, living with others or in a rural area, and having more close friends or greater social support were protective. Perceived levels of loneliness under strict lockdown measures due to COVID-19 were relatively stable in the UK, but for many people these levels were high with no signs of improvement. Results suggest that more efforts are needed to address loneliness.

Summary: This study explored patterns of abuse, self-harm and thoughts of suicide/self-harm in the UK during the first month of the COVID-19 pandemic using data from the COVID-19 Social Study (n=44 775), a non-probability sample weighted to population proportions. The reported frequency of abuse, self-harm and thoughts of suicide/self-harm was higher among women, Black, Asian and minority ethnic (BAME) groups and people experiencing socioeconomic disadvantage, unemployment, disability, chronic physical illnesses, mental disorders and COVID-19 diagnosis. Psychiatric medications were the most common type of support being used, but fewer than half of those affected were accessing formal or informal support.