Background
Studies have documented the detrimental impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on pediatric mental health, exacerbating an existing downward trend and worsening barriers to accessing timely treatment [
1‐
9]. In the US, longitudinal data from the 2016 through 2020 National Surveys of Children’s Health indicated increases in youth anxiety and depression that began before the pandemic; increases in anxiety, depression, and behavioral problems during the pandemic; and decreased access to both mental health and preventive medical care during the pandemic [
3]. The COVID-19 pandemic introduced new acute stressors including social isolation, increased stress on caregivers, increased screen time, and online school [
2]. A global meta-analysis of child mental health found that anxiety and depression rates doubled during the pandemic [
1]. As a result, in October 2021 the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP), the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry (AACAP), and the Children’s Hospital Association (CHA) together declared a national emergency for youth mental health [
10]. Shortly thereafter, the US Surgeon General issued an advisory highlighting the alarming rate of pre-pandemic youth mental health problems that were exacerbated by pandemic-related stressors [
11]. The advisory highlighted the disproportionate impact of COVID-19 on already vulnerable communities, including youth living in low-income households, racial and ethnic minoritized youth, and youth in the child welfare or juvenile justice system [
11].
The impact of COVID-19 on school-age children is of particular concern given the disruptions of critical developmental milestones (e.g., academics and socialization) and the influence of preadolescent mental health problems on future symptoms and functioning [
12,
13]. Despite this, few published studies describe the longitudinal impact of COVID-19 and its related stressors on the mental health of children in the US; even fewer study preadolescent children or the vulnerable populations highlighted by the Surgeon General [
11]. Existing studies are primarily cross-sectional, examine adolescent mental health only, do not include pre-pandemic comparison data, do not evaluate the impact of increased financial hardship and change in social risks (e.g., food or housing insecurity), and/or do not focus on vulnerable populations [
4‐
6,
9,
14]. Understanding the trajectory of child mental health during the first two years of the pandemic, including the relationship between symptoms and other pandemic-related stressors, has important practice and policy implications. Documenting any persistent impact of the pandemic on preadolescent, school-aged children is particularly critical, as this generation may need support throughout childhood and adolescence.
Our objective was to better understand the progression of mental health symptoms during the pandemic among school-aged children and the relationship between mental health and social risks and other mid-pandemic stressors. To achieve this goal, we conducted a longitudinal study, including pre-pandemic data, to evaluate the impact of social risks and remote school on mental health among urban, minoritized (predominantly Black and Latino/a/x/e) children aged 6–11 years old. We published initial results from this cohort after one wave of data collection during the first year of the pandemic, documenting significant increases in internalizing (depression and anxiety) problems and social risks [
7]. Child mental health problems were associated with lower school assignment completion, caregiver mental health, and increased screen time [
7]. The current study includes two additional waves of data collection during the second year of the COVID-19 pandemic to assess the ongoing impact of pandemic-related stressors on child mental health. We examined trajectories in mental health symptoms over time and evaluated correlates of mental health, including social risks (e.g., food insecurity) and school modality. We hypothesized that social risks and school modality would be associated with worse child mental health across time.
Discussion
Our study examines longitudinal mental health during the COVID-19 pandemic in a predominantly minoritized sample of urban elementary school children in the United States. Children in this sample had significant increases in emotional and behavioral symptoms—measured with PSC total scores—that persisted through the first fifteen months of the pandemic. Families also faced significantly more social risks at all waves during the pandemic than before. In longitudinal models accounting for social risks and school modality, social risks were associated with increased mental health symptoms. In-person school attendance was associated with improved mental health, as compared with both hybrid and remote school.
Our findings are consistent with other research showing a rise in child mental health problems related to the pandemic [
1,
2,
5,
6,
8,
9,
32‐
36]. The findings that PSC total scores had not returned to normal levels by the end of our study period support calls for action to meet the increased demand for child mental health services and prevent more serious long-term consequences. [
37,
38]
The persistence of mental health symptoms may be due to multiple factors, including ongoing school disruption and social isolation, reduced access to afterschool and enrichment programs, increased hospitalizations and death rates due to COVID-19 among communities of color [
39], unmet social needs and socioeconomic concerns, and decreased social supports for families. In open-ended responses, caregivers noted persistent concerns about safety due to COVID-19, including during later waves when children returned to in-person school (which increased risk of exposure). Caregivers also shared concerns about social isolation, even after children had begun returing to in-person school.
Children and families in our sample faced significantly more social risks throughout the first 15 months of the pandemic than before, including housing insecurity, food insecurity, financial insecurity, and difficulty obtaining dependent care. Half of participants during Wave 1 reported food insecurity, which decreased to approximately one-third of participants by Wave 3 (as compared with approximately 15% prior to the pandemic). The high persistence of social risks in our sample is consistent with other research [
9,
40]. In an analysis of longitudinal data from the Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development (ABCD) study, Xiao et al. [
9] found that multiple social risks, including food insecurity, disproportionately impacted impacted racial and ethnic minority children. They further found that social risks were significantly associated with internalizing symptoms. Other chronic social stressors that disproportionately affect the mental and physical health of individuals from racial or ethnic minority groups, like structural racism, were exacerbated during the COVID-19 pandemic [
41,
42], potentially impacting the relationship between social risks and mental health in this sample.
The persistence of social risks has critical policy and clinical implications. Attention to improving social supports and providing basic needs for families in the current phase of pandemic recovery should be an urgent public health priority. Pediatric primary care and mental health providers may be able to initiate support for families by using screening and referral programs (e.g., WE CARE [
20]) and partnering with community organizations to connect families in need of care. In addition, policy advocates must work to ensure that public supports aimed at reducing social risks continue to support vulnerable populations that have been disproportionately impacted by the pandemic. Supporting families access to housing, food, and other basic needs should be a critical component of efforts to address the current pediatric mental health crisis.
Persistent remote school or hybrid school (as compared to in-person school) was also associated with child mental health in our sample. Caregivers of children attending school in person reported significantly fewer child mental health symptoms than those of children attending hybrid or remote school, even after accounting for social risks. Existing research documented racial disparities in persistent remote school attendance, with Black students more likely to attend remote school even after accounting for sociodemographic factors [
43]. Thus, persistent remote schooling may have contributed to racial disparities in pandemic-related child mental health problems. In-person school attendance may be protective for child mental health for a number of reasons; schools address some social risks for students (e.g., access to free and reduced-price lunch), provide improved opportunities for peer socialization, and may promote increased physical activity compared to the home environment. Access to in-person school services may therefore be important for supporting child mental health. Enhancing school mental health supports may also play an important role in reducing child mental health problems.
An estimated 230,000 children nationwide have not returned to school since the onset of COVID-19 and are at high risk for mental health difficulties [
44]. Efforts to re-engage these children and families should be an important public health effort. Primary care clinicians may help identify these children at office visits, but partnerships with educational and mental health professionals may also be required to to promote engagement with schools or other in-person activities. Children who remained in remote or hybrid school for an extended period of time may also be at higher risk for mental health problems; additional research is needed to understand how features of the pandemic, such as remote schooling and increased screen time, may impact the long term mental health of children.
Our study has some limitations. Our sample was limited to caregivers of pediatric primary care patients at one urban safety-net hospital, and may not generalize to other populations. The survey was only available in English, Spanish, or Haitian Creole. The longitudinal analysis was limited to variables measured both pre- and mid-pandemic, precluding the inclusion of variables such as screen time, caregiver mental health, and experiences of discrimination. Although using a THRIVE total score as an indicator of social risks has not been validated, we previously used this method in a study with the WE CARE screener (which was used to develop THRIVE) [
21]. We did not collect school modality during the first wave of data collection (August 2020- January 2021) since all Boston Public Schools and most Massachusetts schools were exclusively remote from March 2020 to mid-January 2021 [
23]. In addition, BMC’s pediatric patient population includes primarily publicly insured children living in Boston [
45]. Therefore, for the purposes of longitudinal modeling, we felt comfortable assigning all children a value of ‘in-person only’ for the pre-pandemic time period and a value of ‘remote school only’ for Wave 1. Although it is possible that some students were attending private schools with hybrid or in-person options during the first wave of data collection or had been home schooled prior to and/or during the pandemic, we are confident this is a small number of children. All survey research involves the risk of non-response bias; we believe this risk was minimized through two important factors: (1) children in our sample did not differ significantly in baseline mental health symptoms from the larger population of pediatric primary care patients at our site; and (2) we had over 75% retention of participants across waves of data collection. Our study also relied on caregiver report of child mental health symptoms. It is possible that factors such as increased time spent with children during periods of remote schooling may have influenced caregiver perceptions of child symptomatology. Finally, our hypothesis driven study involved multiple comparisons; given our small sample size, we did not adjust our p-value because of concern about Type II error.
Our study also has strengths. The mixed methods design allowed us to highlight caregiver reported concerns that were not assessed in quantitative survey questions. To reduce barriers to participation, the survey was available in three languages and families could participate by smart phone, computer, or telephone. Our research protocols also allowed us to support caregivers who reported social needs during data collection. We connected caregivers with primary care teams and federal, state, and community-level resources to help alleviate stressors such as food insecurity, housing insecurity, and difficulty with dependent care as part of the study protocol.
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.