Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33434920›Full record

ArticleOccupational medicine (Oxford, England)2021

Mental health of staff working in intensive care during Covid-19.

N Greenberg, D Weston, C Hall, T Caulfield, V Williamson, K Fong

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Occupational medicine (Oxford, England), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 170 papers, 10 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
170citing papers in PubMed, 10 pooled it
23.0field-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

170 citing papers in PubMed, 10 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 359 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

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

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

N GreenbergKing's Centre for Military Health Research, Institute of Psychology, Psychiatry and Neuroscience, King's College London, London, UK.
D WestonBehavioural Science Team, Emergency Response Department Science & Technology, Public Health England, Salisbury, UK.
C HallBehavioural Science Team, Emergency Response Department Science & Technology, Public Health England, Salisbury, UK.
T CaulfieldDepartment of Computer Science, University College London, London, UK.
V WilliamsonKing's Centre for Military Health Research, Institute of Psychology, Psychiatry and Neuroscience, King's College London, London, UK.
K FongDepartment of Science, Technology, Engineering and Public Policy (STEaPP), University College London, London, UK.
King's College London · GBPublic Health England · GBUniversity College Hospital · GBUniversity College London · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundStaff working in intensive care units (ICUs) have faced significant challenges during the COVID-19 pandemic which have the potential to adversely affect their mental health.

aimsTo identify the rates of probable mental health disorder in staff working in ICUs in nine English hospitals during June and July 2020.

methodsAn anonymized brief web-based survey comprising standardized questionnaires examining depression, anxiety symptoms, symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), well-being and alcohol use was administered to staff.

resultsSeven hundred and nine participants completed the surveys comprising 291 (41%) doctors, 344 (49%) nurses and 74 (10%) other healthcare staff. Over half (59%) reported good well-being; however, 45% met the threshold for probable clinical significance on at least one of the following measures: severe depression (6%), PTSD (40%), severe anxiety (11%) or problem drinking (7%). Thirteen per cent of respondents reported frequent thoughts of being better off dead, or of hurting themselves in the past 2 weeks. Within the sample used in this study, we found that doctors reported better mental health than nurses across a range of measures.

conclusionsWe found substantial rates of probable mental health disorders, and thoughts of self-harm, amongst ICU staff; these difficulties were especially prevalent in nurses. Whilst further work is needed to better understand the real level of clinical need amongst ICU staff, these results indicate the need for a national strategy to protect the mental health, and decrease the risk of functional impairment, of ICU staff whilst they carry out their essential work during COVID-19.

Indexed as

Intensive Care UnitsMental HealthPandemicsAdultAlcohol-Related DisordersAnxietyAnxiety DisordersCOVID-19Critical CareDepressionDepressive DisorderEnglandFemaleHumansMaleMental DisordersCOVID-19doctorsintensive caremental healthnursesPTSDself-harm

Identifiers

PMID33434920
PMCPMC7928568
OpenAlexW3120192972

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.