Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34429729›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of clinical and health psychology : IJCHP

An international study on psychological coping during COVID-19: Towards a meaning-centered coping style.

Nikolett Eisenbeck, David F Carreno, Paul T P Wong, Joshua A Hicks, Ruíz-Ruano García María, Jorge L Puga, James Greville, Ines Testoni, Gianmarco Biancalani, Ana Carla Cepeda López and 34 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of clinical and health psychology : IJCHP. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 40 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
40citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

40 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Meaning-Focused Coping in University Students in Hong Kong During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Qualitative Study.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2025
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  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

44 authors.

Nikolett EisenbeckUniversidad de Sevilla, Spain.
David F CarrenoUniversidad de Almería, Spain.
Paul T P WongMeaning-Centered Counselling Institute Inc., Canada.
Joshua A HicksTexas A&M University, USA.
Ruíz-Ruano García MaríaUniversidad de Granada, Spain.
Jorge L PugaUniversidad de Granada, Spain.
James GrevilleUniversity of South Wales, United Kingdom.
Ines TestoniUniversity of Padova, Italy.
Gianmarco BiancalaniUniversity of Padova, Italy.
Ana Carla Cepeda LópezUniversidad de Monterrey, Mexico.
Sofía VillarealUniversidad de Monterrey, Mexico.
Violeta EneaAlexandru Ioan Cuza University, Romania.
Christian Schulz-QuachUniversity of Toronto, Canada.
Jonas JansenRheinland Klinikum Neuss GmbH, Germany.
Maria-Jose Sanchez-RuizLebanese American University, Lebanon.
Murat YıldırımAğrı İbrahim Çeçen University, Turkey.
Gökmen ArslanMehmet Akif Ersoy University, Turkey.
José Fernando A CruzUniversity of Minho, Portugal.
Rui Manuel SofiaPolytechnic Institute of Viana do Castelo, Portugal.
Maria José FerreiraLusófona University of Oporto, Portugal.
Farzana AshrafCOMSATS University, Lahore, Pakistan.
Grażyna WąsowiczKozminski University, Poland.
Shahinaz M ShalabyTanta University, Egypt.
Reham A AmerTanta University, Egypt.
Hadda YousfiUniversity Of Batna 1, Algeria.
JohnBosco Chika ChukwuorjiUniversity of Nigeria Nsukka, Nigeria.
Valeschka M GuerraUniversidade Federal do Espírito Santo, Brazil.
Sandeep SinghGuru Jambheshwar University of Science and Technology, India.
Samantha HeintzelmanRutgers, The State University of New Jersey, US.
Bonar HutapeaUniversitas Tarumanagara, Indonesia.
Bouchara BéjaouiClaude Bernard University Lyon 1, France.
Arobindu DashIUBAT-International University of Business Agriculture and Technology, Bangladesh.
Karoly Kornel SchlosserGoldsmith, University of London, UK.
Malin K AnnikoÖrebro University, Sweden.
Martin RossaOtto von Guericke University Magdeburg, Germany.
Hattaphan WongchareePathumwan Institute of Technology, Thailand.
Andreja AvsecUniversity of Ljubljana, Slovenia.
Gaja Zager KocjanUniversity of Ljubljana, Slovenia.
Tina KavčičUniversity of Ljubljana, Slovenia.
Dmitry A LeontievNational Research University Higher School of Economics, Russia.
Olga TaranenkoNational Research University Higher School of Economics, Russia.
Elena RasskazovaNational Research University Higher School of Economics, Russia.
Elizabeth MaherNew Zealand Acceptance & Commitment Therapy Training Ltd., New Zealand.
José Manuel García-MontesUniversidad de Almería, Spain.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND/

objectiveThis study examined the role of different psychological coping mechanisms in mental and physical health during the initial phases of the COVID-19 crisis with an emphasis on meaning-centered coping.

methodA total of 11,227 people from 30 countries across all continents participated in the study and completed measures of psychological distress (depression, stress, and anxiety), loneliness, well-being, and physical health, together with measures of problem-focused and emotion-focused coping, and a measure called the Meaning-centered Coping Scale (MCCS) that was developed in the present study. Validation analyses of the MCCS were performed in all countries, and data were assessed by multilevel modeling (MLM).

resultsThe MCCS showed a robust one-factor structure in 30 countries with good test-retest, concurrent and divergent validity results. MLM analyses showed mixed results regarding emotion and problem-focused coping strategies. However, the MCCS was the strongest positive predictor of physical and mental health among all coping strategies, independently of demographic characteristics and country-level variables.

conclusionsThe findings suggest that the MCCS is a valid measure to assess meaning-centered coping. The results also call for policies promoting effective coping to mitigate collective suffering during the pandemic.

Indexed as

COVID-19DistressEx post facto studyMeaning-centered coping scaleWell-being

Identifiers

PMID34429729
PMCPMC8355913

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.