ArticleInternal medicine journal2020
COVID-19 in the pre-pandemic period: a survey of the time commitment and perceptions of infectious diseases physicians in Australia and New Zealand.
Article in Internal medicine journal, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Observational
- Emergency clinicians' knowledge, preparedness and experiences of managing COVID-19 during the 2020 global pandemic in Australian healthcare settings.Australasian emergency care · 2021Article
- Experiences and management of physician psychological symptoms during infectious disease outbreaks: a rapid review.BMC psychiatry · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundInfectious diseases (ID) physicians perform a pivotal role in directing the response to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2).
aimTo assess the impact of SARS-CoV-2 on workload and the perceptions of ID physicians regarding the national response in Australia and New Zealand in the pre-pandemic.
methodsA survey of ID physicians in Australia and New Zealand was undertaken from 3 to 10 March 2020. Respondents were asked to estimate time spent on SARS-CoV-2-related activities in February and report their agreement with statements on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 'strongly agree' to 'strongly disagree'. We also asked about the intended use of investigational agents.
resultsThere were 214 respondents (36% of 600 eligible participants). The median workload due to SARS-CoV-2-related activities was 34% of one full-time equivalent (interquartile range 18-68%). Less than a quarter (50, 23%) of respondents had experience managing cases, while 33% (70) had experience preparing during similar pandemics. Nevertheless, 88% (188/213) believed they were well informed when giving testing and management advice, and 45% (95/212) believed their national response was well coordinated. Additionally, 41% (88/214) were worried about becoming infected through occupational exposure. Over half (116, 54%) the respondents intended to use lopinavir/ritonavir in confirmed cases of COVID-19 with severe disease.
conclusionsID physicians spent a large proportion of time on SARS-CoV-2-related activities. Increased staffing is required to avoid burnout. Importantly, ID physicians feel well informed when giving advice. A national body should be established to co-ordinate response. Treatment efficacy trials are needed to clarify the utility of unproven treatments.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.