Disentangling the diversity of profiles of adaptation in youth during COVID-19

Abstract

Background: The COVID-19 outbreak has major psychosocial consequences on the global population and specialists report that youth may be significantly impacted. Adolescents and young adults, for whom social life is an important protective factor, had to face a new isolation caused by social distancing and home schooling. This study aims to explore youth's profiles of adaptation to COVID-19 pandemic in the province of Quebec, Canada, and the risk factors and strengths associated with each profile. Methods: A sample of 4936 youth living in Quebec were recruited on social media and filled out an online survey during the lockdown of the first wave of COVID-19. They completed measures of psychological distress, positive adaptation (well-being, resilience), risk factors (alexithymia and emotional dysregulation), COVID-related worries and fear of contamination and COVID-related post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Results: The results of the latent class analysis showed four patterns of adjustment. The Resilient group (36.6% of the sample) showed the highest probability of a positive adaptation. The High distress class (29.5%) reported clinical distress, low to moderate symptoms of PTSD and fear of contamination and no significant well-being. The Moderate symptoms class (17.55%) showed moderate levels of distress and COVID-related symptoms, with half of the group still showing significant well-being. The Traumatized class (16.35%) reported the worst adaptation. Correlates significantly differentiated profiles. Limitations: The study relied on a convenience sample and a cross-sectional design. Conclusion: Disentangling the diversity of adaptation profiles may orient more adapted resources for youth in need during this unprecedented crisis.

Resilience to COVID-19 challenges: Lessons for school psychologists serving school-attending youth with experiences of marginalization

“…Studies of youth resilience to pandemic-related challenges also report a mix of resilience-enabling resources. For example, in their study with 4,936 young people living in Quebec, Hebert et al (2022) found that young people followed diverse pathways of adaptation to pandemic-related challenges. What distinguished pathways of resilience and less psychological distress from pathways associated with increased vulnerability and greater psychological distress was young people's access to protective resources, both within themselves (e.g., capacity to regulate their emotions) and their social ecology (e.g., accessible social support).…”

“…As illustrated by these two studies (Hebert et al, 2022;Theron et al, 2021), while there were commonalities in what enabled resilience to the pandemic's impacts (i.e., personal and social resources), the resources that young people reported were not identical. This fits resilience science's more recent attention to how developmental stage and situational and cultural context can heighten the protective value of specific protective resources (Masten et al, 2021;Ungar & Theron, 2020;Yoon et al, 2021), Given this complexity, if SPs want to optimize how they support student resilience to pandemic impacts, then they need to investigate which resources have greater protective value for specific groups of students at lower and higher levels of risk exposure rather than generalize what is known about commonly occurring resilience-enabling resources (Ungar, 2019).…”

Children and youth mental health: not all equal in the face of the COVID-19 pandemic

“…All studies but one that considered gender in their analysis showed that adolescent girls were more likely to present anxiety and depressive symptoms than male adolescents and younger children. Recent studies not considered in the above review—as they were published in early 2022—confirm that psychological distress during COVID-19 is greater for females (compared to males) and for adolescents (compared to children) (for example, Hébert et al., 2022 ), suggesting that differential responses should be implemented to address mental health consequences in different populations.…”