Search

The COVID-19 pandemic and measures have placed various burdens on societies and individuals. Emerging evidence suggests that people in drug addiction recovery were negatively affected. This study investigates whether risk and protective factors associated with return to problematic substance use differed between the periods before and during the pandemic for those in recovery. A convenience sample of persons in drug addiction recovery for at least three months completed an assessment at baseline before the pandemic (T0, N = 367) and at two consecutive follow-ups 12 months apart (T1, N = 311; T2, N = 246). The final follow-up took place during the pandemic (2020−2021). We analyzed rates and predictors of problematic substance use in both periods, and whether relations between predictors and problematic use differed between the periods. Rates of problematic use did not differ significantly before and during the pandemic for those who were followed-up. However, the relationship between problematic use and commitment to sobriety differed between both periods (OR = 3.24, P = 0.010), as higher commitment was only associated with lower odds of problematic use during (OR = 0.27, P < 0.001), but not before, the pandemic (OR = 0.93, P = 0.762). In both periods, persons who were engaged in psychosocial support had lower odds of problematic use. The COVID-19 pandemic was not followed by significant return to problematic substance use in a cohort of people who were already in drug addiction recovery for some time before the pandemic. However, with restricted access to environmental resources, they may have been more dependent on internal motivations. Targeting personal recovery resources with interventions could therefore reduce the chances of return to problematic substance use during a pandemic. • The COVID-19 pandemic was not followed by an increase in problematic substance use in a drug addiction recovery cohort. • Different variables predicted problematic substance use in recovery in the period before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. • During the pandemic participants seem to have been more dependent on commitment from themselves to prevent problematic use. • Building up internal recovery resources may reduce vulnerability for return to problematic substance use during a pandemic. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Socioeconomic inequalities in childhood Body Mass Index (BMI) are becoming increasingly more pronounced across the world. Although countries differ in the direction and strength of these inequalities, cross-national comparative research on this topic is rare. This paper draws on harmonized longitudinal cohort data from four wealthy countries—Germany, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom (UK), and the United States (US)—to 1) map cross-country differences in the magnitude of socioeconomic inequalities in childhood BMI, and 2) to examine cross-country differences in the role of three energy-balance-related behaviors—physical activity, screen time, and breakfast consumption—in explaining these inequalities. Children were aged 5–7 at our first timepoint and were followed up at age 8–11. We used data from the German National Educational Panel Study, the Dutch Generation R study, the UK Millennium Cohort Study and the US Early Childhood Longitudinal-Kindergarten Study. All countries revealed significant inequalities in childhood BMI. The US stood out in having the largest inequalities. Overall, inequalities between children with low versus medium educated parents were smaller than those between children with high versus medium educated parents. The role of energy-balance-related behaviors in explaining inequalities in BMI was surprisingly consistent. Across countries, physical activity did not, while screen time and breakfast consumption did play a role. The only exception was that breakfast consumption did not play a role in the US. Cross-country differences emerged in the relative contribution of each behavior in explaining inequalities in BMI: Breakfast consumption was most important in the UK, screen time explained most in Germany and the US, and breakfast consumption and screen time were equally important in the Netherlands. Our findings suggest that what constitutes the most effective policy intervention differs across countries and that these should target both children from medium as well as low educated families. • All countries showed substantial socioeconomic inequalities in childhood BMI. • In all countries, inequalities in BMI steepen over course of primary school. • Protective factors among the most advantaged seem to mainly drive inequalities. • Across most countries, underlying mechanisms for inequalities in BMI are similar. • The relative contribution of each mechanism to BMI inequalities differs per country. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]