Open AccessDesign, content, and fieldwork procedures of the COVID‐19 Psychological Research Consortium (C19PRC) Study – Wave 4
Author(s) -
McBride Orla,
Butter Sarah,
Murphy Jamie,
Shevlin Mark,
Hartman Todd K.,
Bennett Kate M.,
Stocks Thomas V. A.,
Lloyd Alex,
McKay Ryan,
GibsonMiller Jilly,
Levita Liat,
Mason Liam,
Martinez Anton P.,
Hyland Philip,
Vallières Frédérique,
Karatzias Thanos,
Valiente Carmen,
Vazquez Carmelo,
Bentall Richard P.
Publication year - 2022
Publication title -
international journal of methods in psychiatric research
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.275
H-Index - 73
eISSN - 1557-0657
pISSN - 1049-8931
DOI - 10.1002/mpr.1899
Subject(s) - attrition , longitudinal study , anxiety , covid-19 , pandemic , mental health , psychology , population , sample (material) , politics , gerontology , demography , political science , medicine , sociology , psychiatry , chemistry , disease , dentistry , pathology , chromatography , infectious disease (medical specialty) , law
Objectives This paper outlines fieldwork procedures for Wave 4 of the COVID‐19 Psychological Research Consortium (C19PRC) Study in the UK during November–December 2020. Methods Respondents provided data on socio‐political attitudes, beliefs, and behaviours, and mental health disorders (anxiety, depression, and posttraumatic stress). In Phase 1, adults ( N = 2878) were reinvited to participate. At Phase 2, new recruitment: (i) replenished the longitudinal strand to account for attrition; and (ii) oversampled from the devolved UK nations to facilitate robust between‐country analyses for core study outcomes. Weights were calculated using a survey raking algorithm to ensure the longitudinal panel was representative of the baseline sample characteristics. Results In Phase 1, 1796 adults were successfully recontacted and provided full interviews at Wave 4 (62.4% retention rate). In Phase 2, 292 new respondents were recruited to replenish the panel, as well as 1779 adults from Wales, Scotland, and Northern Ireland, who were representative of the socio‐political composition of the adult populations in these nations. The raking procedure successfully re‐balanced the longitudinal panel to within 1% of population estimates for selected socio‐demographic characteristics. Conclusion The C19PRC Study offers a unique opportunity to facilitate and stimulate interdisciplinary research addressing important public health questions relating to the COVID‐19 pandemic.