An 18‐month follow‐up of the Covid‐19 psychology research consortium study panel: Survey design and fieldwork procedures for Wave 6

• Published in: International journal of methods in psychiatric research Vol. 32; no. 2; pp. e1949 - n/a
• Main Authors: McBride, Orla, Butter, Sarah, Martinez, Anton P., Shevlin, Mark, Murphy, Jamie, Hartman, Todd K., McKay, Ryan, Hyland, Philip, Bennett, Kate M., Stocks, Thomas V. A., Gibson‐Miller, Jilly, Levita, Liat, Mason, Liam, Bentall, Richard P.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: United States John Wiley & Sons, Inc 01.06.2023; John Wiley and Sons Inc; Wiley
• Subjects: Adult; Adults; attrition; Consortia; Coronaviruses; COVID-19; COVID-19 vaccines; Cross-Sectional Studies; Field study; Follow-Up Studies; GDP; Gross Domestic Product; Humans; Immunization; Longitudinal studies; longitudinal survey; Medical research; Mental Disorders; Mental health; Original; Pandemics; Polls & surveys; Post traumatic stress disorder; psychological; Psychological research; Public health; Sociodemographics; Surveys; Surveys and Questionnaires; United Kingdom > UK; England; COVID-19; attrition; psychological; longitudinal survey; mental health
• ISSN: 1049-8931; 1557-0657; 1557-0657
• DOI: 10.1002/mpr.1949

Objectives Established in March 2020, the C19PRC Study monitors the psychological and socio‐economic impact of the pandemic in the UK and other countries. This paper describes the protocol for Wave 6 (August–September 2021). Methods The survey assessed: COVID‐19 related experiences; experiences of common mental health disorders; psychological characteristics; and social and political attitudes. Adult participants from any previous wave (N = 3170) were re‐invited, and sample replenishment procedures helped manage attrition. Weights were calculated using a survey raking algorithm to ensure the on‐going original panel (from baseline) was nationally representative in terms of gender, age, and household income, amongst other factors. Results 1643 adults were re‐interviewed at Wave 6 (51.8% retention rate). Non‐participation was higher younger adults, those born outside UK, and adults living in cities. Of the adults recruited at baseline, 54.3% (N = 1100) participated in Wave 6. New respondent (N = 415) entered the panel at this wave, resulting in cross‐sectional sample for Wave 6 of 2058 adults. The raking procedure re‐balanced the longitudinal panel to within 1.3% of population estimates for selected socio‐demographic characteristics. Conclusions This paper outlines the growing strength of the publicly available C19PRC Study data for COVID‐19‐related interdisciplinary research.