Table 1.
Questions on adversities.
Table 2.
Weighted figures. Between SD is the standard deviation in participants’ average responses. Within SD is the standard deviations in an individual’s report, averaged across participants.
Fig 1.
Associations (with 95% confidence intervals) between (i) change in total number of adversity experiences and (ii) total number of adversity worries and odds of bad quality sleep.
Derived from REWB models. Note: Models either added experiences and worries separately or simultaneously (i.e. so mutually adjusted for one another). Analyses were further adjusted for day of the week and time since lockdown began.
Fig 2.
Associations (with 95% confidence intervals) between (i) change in experience of specific types of adversities or (ii) worries about specific types of adversities and odds of poor sleep.
Derived from REWB models. Experiences and worries were entered into separate models, for each category of adversity in turn. Analyses were further adjusted for day of the week and time since lockdown began.
Fig 3.
Associations (with 95% confidence intervals) between (i) change in total number of adversity experiences and (ii) total number of adversity worries and odds of poor quality sleep according to (a) living arrangement, (b) social network size), (c) loneliness, and (d) perceived social support at baseline data collection.
Estimates are from REWB models, with experiences and worries entered into separate models. Analyses were further adjusted for day of the week and time since lockdown began.
Fig 4.
Associations (with 95% confidence intervals) between (i) change in total number of adversity experiences and (ii) total number of adversity worries and odds of poor quality sleep according to mental health diagnosis at baseline data collection.
Note: Estimates are from REWB models, with experiences and worries entered into separate models. Analyses were further adjusted for day of the week and time since lockdown began.