Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33313579›Full record

ArticleJournal of affective disorders reports2020

Psychological impact of COVID-19 pandemic: Protocol and results of first three weeks from an international cross-section survey - focus on health professionals.

Shanaya Rathod, Saseendran Pallikadavath, Allan H Young, Lizi Graves, Mohammad Mahbubur Rahman, Ashlea Brooks, Mustafa Soomro, Pranay Rathod, Peter Phiri

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of affective disorders reports, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.8field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

24 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 46 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. (Mis)Information, Fears and Preventative Health Behaviours Related to COVID-19.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

9 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Shanaya RathodResearch department, Southern Health NHS Foundation Trust, UK.
Saseendran PallikadavathPortsmouth-Brawijaya Centre for Global Health, Population, and Policy University of Portsmouth, UK.
Allan H YoungKings College London, UK.
Lizi GravesResearch department, Southern Health NHS Foundation Trust, UK.
Mohammad Mahbubur RahmanPortsmouth-Brawijaya Centre for Global Health, Population, and Policy University of Portsmouth, UK.
Ashlea BrooksResearch department, Southern Health NHS Foundation Trust, UK.
Mustafa SoomroSolent NHS Trust, St Marys community Mental health campus, Portsmouth, UK.
Pranay RathodPPI Rep, London, UK.
Peter PhiriResearch department, Southern Health NHS Foundation Trust, UK.
Southern Health NHS Foundation Trust · GBUniversity of Portsmouth · GBKing's College London · GBSolent NHS Trust · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe psychological impact of COVID-19, resultant measures and future consequences to life will be unveiled in time.

aimTo investigate the psychological impact of COVID-19, resultant restrictions, impact on behaviours and mental wellbeing globally. This early analysis, explores positive and adverse factors and behaviours with focus on healthcare professionals.

methodsThis is a cross-sectional survey, using a questionnaire based on published approaches to understand the psychological impact of COVID-19. The survey will be repeated at 6 months because of rapidly changing situation.

resultsWe have presented results from first 3 weeks of the survey. Conclusions may change as more individuals take part over time. 7,917 participants completed the survey in the first 3 weeks; 7,271 are from the United Kingdom. 49.7% of the participants are healthcare professionals. There is high representation of female participants. Participants reporting suicidal thoughts is 32%. Healthcare professionals have reported mild depression and anxiety in higher proportions. Increasing age and female gender report higher compliance with government advice on COVID 19 whereas higher education, homeowners, key worker status, high alcohol, drug use and participants with pre-existing suicidal thoughts reported low compliance with government advice. Participants who reported suicidal thoughts pre-COVID are less likely to communicate with friends and family, or engage in coping strategies.

conclusionsEvidence has shown an adverse psychological impact of previous pandemics on the population, especially wellbeing of healthcare professionals. Research should focus on identifying the need, preparing services and determining the factors that enhance and build resilience.

fundingThis survey is linked to a MRC global health research program of the Portsmouth-Brawijaya center for Global Health, Population, and Policy, (MR/N006267/1), University of Portsmouth.

Indexed as

Covid-19Healthcare professionalsPsychological impact

Identifiers

PMID33313579
PMCPMC7507987
OpenAlexW3087058581

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.