The COVID-19 pandemic presents a significant challenge to wellbeing for people around the world. Here, we examine which individual and societal factors can predict the extent to which individuals suffer or thrive during the COVID-19 outbreak, with survey data collected from 26,684 participants in 51 countries from 17 April to 15 May 2020. We show that wellbeing is linked to an individual's recent experiences of specific momentary positive and negative emotions, including love, calm, determination, and loneliness. Higher socioeconomic status was associated with better wellbeing. The present study provides a rich map of emotional experiences and wellbeing around the world during the COVID-19 outbreak, and points to calm, connection, and control as central to our wellbeing at this time of collective crisis.

The COVID-19 pandemic presents a significant challenge to wellbeing for people around the world. Here, we examine which individual and societal factors can predict the extent to which individuals suffer or thrive during the COVID-19 outbreak, with survey data collected from 26,684 participants in 51 countries from 17 April to 15 May 2020. We show that wellbeing is linked to an individual’s recent experiences of specific momentary positive and negative emotions, including love, calm, determination, and loneliness. Higher socioeconomic status was associated with better wellbeing. The present study provides a rich map of emotional experiences and wellbeing around the world during the COVID-19 outbreak, and points to calm, connection, and control as central to our wellbeing at this time of collective crisis.

BackgroundConsistent evidence suggests that face-to-face cognitive-behavioural therapy (CBT) and interpersonal psychotherapy (IPT) may be equally effective depression treatments. Current clinical research focuses on detecting the best predictors-moderators of efficacy to guide treatment personalisation. However, individual moderator studies show inconsistent findings. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare the efficacy of CBT and IPT, including combined treatment with antidepressants for depression, and evaluate the predictive power of demographic, clinical presentation and treatment characteristics moderators for both therapies.MethodsPsycArticles, PsycINFO, PubMed and Cochrane Library were systematically searched through December 2017 for studies that have assessed individuals with major depression receiving either CBT or IPT in a face-to-face format both at pre- and post-treatment. Random-effects moderator meta-analyses were conducted.ResultsIn total 168 samples from 137 studies including 11 374 participants qualified for the meta-analytic review. CBT and IPT were equally effective across all but one prespecified moderators. For psychotherapy delivered without concomitant antidepressant treatment [antidepressant medications (ADMs)], CBT was superior to IPT (g = 1.68, Qbetweenp = 0.037). Within-CBT moderator analyses showed that increased CBT efficacy was associated with lower age, high initial depression severity, individual format of administration and no adjunctive ADMs. Within-IPT analyses showed comparable efficacy across all moderators.ConclusionsClinical guidance around combined treatment (psychotherapy plus ADMs) should be reconsidered. CBT alone is superior to IPT alone and to combined treatment, while IPT alone is non-inferior to combined treatment. More research is needed to assess the moderating effect of older age and number of previous episodes on IPT efficacy.

During stressful circumstances, such as the COVID-19 pandemic, disturbances in emotional experiences can occur. These emotional disturbances, if not relieved or regulated, can be associated with feelings of depression. Currently, little is known about which emotional experiences (positive and negative) are associated with feelings of depression during COVID-19. This study aimed to estimate and compare mixed, positive and negative valence emotion networks during COVID-19 for low, moderate and high levels of self-reported depression. Across 26,034 participants, central emotional experiences included gratitude, sadness, fear, anxiety, compassion, and being moved for all self-reported depression levels; love for low levels of depression, and confusion for high levels of depression. The strongest edges included fear-anxiety, loneliness-boredom, anger-disgust, determination-hope, and compassion-being moved for all self-reported depression levels; calm-relief, and sadnessfrustration for high levels of self-reported depression; and admiration-being moved for low and moderate self-reported depression levels. Network comparison tests showed mixed, positive and negative emotion networks significantly differed in structure across all selfreported depression levels. Network connectivity was also significantly stronger for low selfreported depression within positive and negative emotion networks. These networks provide key information on emotional experiences associated with depression during COVID-19.

ObjectiveConsistent evidence suggests residual depressive symptomology are the strongest predictors of depression relapse following cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) and antidepressant medications (ADM's). Psychometric network models help detecting and understanding central symptoms that remain post-treatment, along with their complex co-occurrences. However, individual psychometric network studies show inconsistent findings. This systematic review and IPD network analysis aimed to estimate and compare the symptom network structures of residual depressive symptoms following CBT, ADM's, and their combination.MethodsPsycINFO, PsycArticles, and PubMed were systematically searched through October 2020 for studies that have assessed individuals with major depression at post-treatment receiving either CBT and/or ADM's (venlafaxine, escitalopram, mirtazapine). IPD was requested from eligible samples to estimate and compare residual symptom psychometric network models post-CBT and post-ADM's.ResultsIn total, 25 from 663 eligible samples, including 1,389 patients qualified for the IPD. Depressed mood and anhedonia were consistently central residual symptoms post-CBT and post-ADM's. For CBT, fatigue-related and anxiety symptoms were also central post-treatment. A significant difference in network structure across treatments (CBT vs. ADM) was observed for samples measuring depression severity using the MADRS. Specifically, stronger symptom occurrences were present amongst lassitude-suicide post-CBT (vs. ADM's) and amongst lassitude-inability to feel post-ADM's (vs. CBT). No significant difference in global strength was observed across treatments.ConclusionsCore major depression symptoms remain central across treatments, strategies to target these symptoms should be considered. Anxiety and fatigue related complaints also remain central post-CBT. Efforts must be made amongst researchers, institutions, and journals to permit sharing of IPD.Systematic Review Registration: A protocol was prospectively registered on PROSPERO (CRD42020141663; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.php?RecordID=141663).