Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33776213›Full record

ReviewPsychotherapeut2021

[Importance of the COVID-19 pandemic for public health and group psychological aspects-Part 2 of a (preliminary) review].

Bernhard Strauß, Jenny Rosendahl, Uwe Berger

Erratum issuedOpen access · bronzeAbstract readEnglish AbstractReview
In one paragraph

Review in Psychotherapeut, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 38% 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

0 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

  • Erratum issued
    2021
5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Bernhard StraußInstitut für Psychosoziale Medizin, Psychotherapie und Psychoonkologie, Universitätsklinikum Jena, Stoystr. 3, 07740 Jena, Deutschland.
Jenny RosendahlInstitut für Psychosoziale Medizin, Psychotherapie und Psychoonkologie, Universitätsklinikum Jena, Stoystr. 3, 07740 Jena, Deutschland.
Uwe BergerInstitut für Psychosoziale Medizin, Psychotherapie und Psychoonkologie, Universitätsklinikum Jena, Stoystr. 3, 07740 Jena, Deutschland.
Jena University Hospital · DEKlinik und Poliklinik für Psychotherapie und Psychosomatik · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Based upon the findings related to the impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on human living conditions and psychological health, in the first part of this review the authors discuss the consequences of the pandemic for public health. It is surprising to see that related to public health but also psychological factors and sequelae of the pandemic, a broad knowledge was already available based upon former pandemics and disasters long before the outbreak of COVID-19. This knowledge has been used very sparsely, if at all, for health political decisions. In view of the social significance of the pandemic and its social impact, findings from group psychology and group dynamics seem to be specifically important for a better understanding of behavior within the population as well as the conceptualization of public health interventions. An increase in psychological disorders was described related to the pandemic. For the treatment of these disorders, a range of psychotherapeutic approaches including evidence-based group psychotherapy are available. Whereas the use of telemedical and digital techniques is increasingly more common within individual psychotherapy, many questions are still open related to online group treatment.

Indexed as

Group dynamicsGroup psychotherapyHealth knowledge, attitudes, practicePreventionPublic health

Identifiers

PMID33776213
PMCPMC7988379
OpenAlexW3163532141

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.