Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33844359›Full record

Observational studyJournal of nursing management2021

Health care workers' protection and psychological safety during the COVID-19 pandemic in Spain.

Sara Domínguez-Salas, Juan Gómez-Salgado, Carlos Guillén-Gestoso, Macarena Romero-Martín, Mónica Ortega-Moreno, Carlos Ruiz-Frutos

Open access · greenAbstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in Journal of nursing management, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
9.0field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 34 citations in OpenAlex.

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

6 authors at 4 institutions in 4 countries.

Sara Domínguez-SalasDepartment of Psychology, Universidad Loyola Andalucía, Dos Hermanas, Sevilla, Spain.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5666-1487
Juan Gómez-SalgadoDepartment of Sociology, Social Work and Public Health, Faculty of Labour Sciences, University of Huelva, Huelva, Spain.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9053-7730
Carlos Guillén-GestosoUniversidade Atlantica Lisboa, Barcarena, Portugal.
Macarena Romero-MartínDepartment of Nursing, Faculty of Nursing, University of Huelva, Huelva, Spain.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3022-3339
Mónica Ortega-MorenoDepartment of Economy. Faculty of Labour Sciences, University of Huelva, Huelva, Spain.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3317-9898
Carlos Ruiz-FrutosDepartment of Sociology, Social Work and Public Health, Faculty of Labour Sciences, University of Huelva, Huelva, Spain.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3715-1382
Universidad de Especialidades Espíritu Santo · ECUniversidad de Huelva · ESAtlântica Instituto Universitário · PTUniversidad Loyola Andalucía · ES

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimsTo analyse the relationship between work engagement, sense of coherence and psychological distress levels in Spanish health professionals who were active during the COVID-19 pandemic lockdown.

backgroundWork engagement and sense of coherence can help professionals to cope with work-related psychological distress due to the harsh conditions of the COVID-19 working environment.

methodsCross-sectional observational study of 1,459 health care professionals. The Utrecht Work Engagement Scale, the Sense of Coherence Scale and Goldberg's General Health Questionnaire were distributed and analysed with descriptive and multiple linear regression methods.

resultsHigh levels of work engagement, especially in the dedication dimension, of sense of coherence, in particular in the meaningfulness dimension, and psychological distress were obtained. Significant correlations (p < .001) were identified between all the variables.

conclusionsWork engagement and sense of coherence correlated positively with each other and both negatively with psychological distress. So, health care professionals, despite presenting psychological distress, perceive their work satisfactorily and positively despite the severity of the situation and the harsh conditions. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING MANAGEMENT: Sense of coherence and work engagement are protective factors against psychological distress. Preventive measures for professionals should go through the dimensionalization of the problem and the adaptation of practical measures for daily management.

Indexed as

COVID-19PandemicsCommunicable Disease ControlCross-Sectional StudiesHealth PersonnelHumansSARS-CoV-2SpainCOVID-19health care professionalspsychological distresssense of coherencework engagement

Identifiers

PMID33844359
PMCPMC8250215
OpenAlexW3155262911

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.