Dataset Information

Making sense of a pandemic: Mindsets influence emotions, behaviors, health, and wellbeing during the COVID-19 pandemic.

ABSTRACT:

Rationale

As the SARS-COV-2 virus spread across the world in the early months of 2020, people sought to make sense of the complex and rapidly evolving situation by adopting mindsets about what the pandemic was and what it meant for their lives.

Objective

We aimed to measure the mindsets of American adults over the first six months of the COVID-19 pandemic to understand their relative stability over time and their relationship with emotions, behaviors, experiences, and wellbeing.

Methods

American adults (N = 5,365) were recruited in early March of 2020 to participate in a longitudinal survey with follow-up surveys at 6-weeks and 6-months. Three mindsets that people formed about the COVID-19 pandemic were measured: 'the pandemic is a catastrophe', 'the pandemic is manageable' and 'the pandemic can be an opportunity'.

Results

In line with our pre-registered hypotheses, these mindsets were associated with a unique and largely self-fulfilling pattern of emotions (positive, negative), behaviors (healthy, unhealthy, and compliance with CDC guidelines), experiences (growth/connection, isolation/meaninglessness) and wellbeing (physical health, mental health, quality of life). Moreover, mindsets formed in the first week of the pandemic were associated with quality of life 6 months later, an effect that was mediated by emotions and health behaviors.

Conclusion

The mindsets that people adopted about the COVID-19 pandemic - that it is 'a catastrophe', 'manageable', or 'an opportunity' may explain some of the heterogeneity in the lived experiences of Americans through their self-fulfilling impact on peoples' emotions, health behaviors, and wellbeing.

SUBMITTER: Zion SR

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8930786 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background and objectiveHigh-quality care standards for dementia care are increasingly based on person-centered care principles. To better understand facilitating factors of person-centered care this research focuses on individual characteristics of care professionals. Applying mindset theory to dementia care, we examined dementia mindsets (viewing dementia symptoms as either malleable or fixed) in care professionals. We tested whether there is a positive relationship between a malleable dementia mindset and person-centered care as well as a negative relationship between a fixed dementia mindset and person-centered care. Moreover, we examined whether care professionals' emotional responses in care situations help explain associations between dementia mindsets and person-centered care.Research design and methodIn two cross-sectional studies, care professionals of long-term care facilities (total N = 370) completed a measure of dementia mindsets and reported their emotional and behavioral responses to five care scenarios. Regression and mediation analyses were performed.FindingsThe tested hypotheses were partially supported. A fixed dementia mindset predicted reported person-centered care negatively, while a malleable dementia mindset did not. Mediation analyses suggest that reduced negative emotions may underlie the association between a malleable mindset and reported person-centered care, while reduced positive emotions in care situations may underlie the association of a fixed mindset and reported person-centered care. Study 2 partially replicated these findings. A fixed mindset and positive emotional responses were the most robust predictors of reported person-centered care.Discussion and implicationsThis study extends knowledge on facilitators (positive emotional responses to care situations) and barriers (fixed dementia mindset) to person-centered care in care professionals working with persons with dementia. We discuss how dementia mindsets and emotional responses to care situations may be a fruitful target for trainings for care professionals.

Project description:PurposeGamma knife radiosurgery (GK) is a commonly used approach for the treatment of intracranial lesions. Its radiation response is typically not immediate, but delayed. In this study, we analyzed cases from a prospectively collected database to assess the influence of COVID-19 pandemic on the decision making in patients treated by gamma knife radiosurgery.MethodsFrom January 2019 to August 2021, 540 cases of intracranial lesions were treated by GK with 207 cases before COVID-19 pandemic as a control. During the COVID-19 pandemic, 333 cases were similarly treated on patients with or without the COVID-19 vaccination. All the GK treated parameters as well as time profile in the decision making were analyzed. The parameters included age, sex, characteristic of lesion, targeted volume, peripheral radiation dose, neurological status, Karnofsky Performance Status (KPS), time interval from MRI diagnosis to consultation, time interval from the approval to treatment, frequency of outpatient department (OPD) visit, and frequency of imaging follow-up.ResultsLonger time intervals from diagnosis to GK consultation and treatment were found in the pandemic group (36.8 ± 25.5/54.5 ± 27.6 days) compared with the pre-COVID control (17.1 ± 22.4/45.0 ± 28.0 days) or vaccination group (12.2 ± 7.1/29.6 ± 10.9 days) (p < 0.001, and p < 0.001, respectively). The fewer OPD visits and MRI examinations also showed the same trends. High proportion of neurological deficits were found in the pandemic group (65.4%) compared with the control (45.4%) or vaccination group (58.1%) (p < 0.001). The Charlson comorbidity in the pandemic group was 3.9 ± 3.3, the control group was 4.6 ± 3.2, and the vaccination group was 3.1 ± 3.1. There were similar inter-group difference (p < 0.001). In multiple variant analyses, longer time intervals from the diagnosis to consultation or treatment, OPD frequency and MRI examination were likely influenced by the status of the COVID-19 pandemic as they were alleviated by the vaccination.ConclusionsThe decision making in patients requiring gamma knife treatment was most likely influenced by the status of the COVID-19 pandemic, while vaccination appeared to attenuate their hesitant behaviors. Patients with pre-treatment neurological deficits and high co-morbidity undergoing the gamma knife treatment were less affected by the COVID-19 pandemic.