Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32294078›Full record

ArticleMedical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research2020

Comparison of the Indicators of Psychological Stress in the Population of Hubei Province and Non-Endemic Provinces in China During Two Weeks During the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Outbreak in February 2020.

Shuai Yuan, Zhenxin Liao, Haojie Huang, Boyue Jiang, Xueyan Zhang, Yingwen Wang, Mingyi Zhao

Open access · hybridAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 72 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
72citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
15.3field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

72 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 187 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Initiation of tobacco use during the pandemic: risk factors in the Brazilian context.Revista brasileira de epidemiologia = Brazilian journal of epidemiology · 2026
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Observational
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Nursing Home Residents' Perceptions of Challenges and Coping Strategies during COVID-19 Pandemic in China.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023
    Article
  19. Review
  20. Article

12 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Shuai YuanDepartment of Pediatrics, The Third Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, Hunan, China (mainland).
Zhenxin LiaoDepartment of Pediatrics, The Third Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, Hunan, China (mainland).
Haojie HuangDepartment of Pediatrics, The Third Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, Hunan, China (mainland).
Boyue JiangDepartment of Pediatrics, The Third Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, Hunan, China (mainland).
Xueyan ZhangDepartment of Pediatrics, The Third Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, Hunan, China (mainland).
Yingwen WangDepartment of Pediatrics, The Third Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, Hunan, China (mainland).
Mingyi ZhaoDepartment of Pediatrics, The Third Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, Hunan, China (mainland).
Third Xiangya Hospital · CNCentral South University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND During February 2020, the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) epidemic in Hubei Province, China, was at its height, requiring isolation of the population. This study aimed to compare the emotional state, somatic responses, sleep quality, and behavior of people in Hubei Province with non-endemic provinces in China during two weeks in February 2020.  MATERIAL AND METHODS Questionnaires were completed by 939 individuals (357 men; 582 women), including 33 from Hubei and 906 from non-endemic provinces. The Stress Response Questionnaire (SRQ) determined the emotional state, somatic responses, and behavior. The Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) was used to measure the duration of sleep and sleep quality. RESULTS There were 939 study participants, aged 18-24 years (35.89%) and 25-39 years (35.57%); 65.92% were university students. During a two week period in February 2020, the emotional state and behavior of participants in Hubei improved, but the quality of sleep did not. Health workers and business people became increasingly anxious, but other professionals became less anxious. The data showed that most people in Hubei Province developed a more positive attitude regarding their risk of infection and the chances of surviving the COVID-19 epidemic. CONCLUSIONS During a two-week period, front-line health workers and people in Hubei Province became less anxious about the COVID-19 epidemic, but sleep quality did not improve. Despite public awareness, levels of anxiety exist that affect the quality of life during epidemics, including periods of population quarantine. Therefore, health education should be combined with psychological counseling for vulnerable individuals.

Indexed as

BetacoronavirusCoronavirus InfectionsPandemicsPneumonia, ViralStress, PsychologicalAdolescentAdultAnxietyCOVID-19Disease OutbreaksEmotionsFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedSARS-CoV-2

Identifiers

PMID32294078
PMCPMC7177041
OpenAlexW3016044110

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.