ArticleInternational nursing review2022
COVID-19 and the global need for knowledge on nurses' health.
Article in International nursing review, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Predictors of nurses' work-related mental health during the COVID-19 pandemic: a paired follow-up study.Frontiers in health services · 2025Article
- COVID-19 and the global need for knowledge on nurses' health.International nursing review · 2022Article
- Article
- [Nurses after the Covid-19 pandemic: what now?]Enfermeria clinicaArticle
- Nurses after the Covid-19 pandemic: What now?Enfermeria clinicaArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimTo emphasize that nurses need to be fully protected to carry out their vital role, particularly during pandemics, yet the lack of a standardized and systematic collection of high-quality disaggregated data on nurses health inhibits our ability to assess this within and across countries.
backgroundNurses are the largest workforce group in the health sector, yet only 59 countries worldwide report on nurse COVID-19 infections and related deaths, and the standardized, systematic collection of disaggregated health data is not yet in place. SOURCES OF EVIDENCE: Medline, International Council of Nurses, World Health Organization, Centers of Disease Control and Prevention and the experiences of the authors. DISCUSSION: Inconsistent recording and definitions of nurses, precarious and informal employment conditions, limited transparent and reliable data, lack of mass testing and long-standing structural issues and biases have affected nursing for too long.
conclusionsThese issues are reflected in the limited capacity of many national public health information systems to collect, monitor and report on the health of the largest group of health workers. Political will, accountability and public data transparency at different levels are essential to adequately protect nurses at work. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING PRACTICE, AND NURSING AND HEALTH POLICY: Building on current momentum in the nursing field, immediate political action is required to strengthen existing nursing and midwifery policies, standards and regulatory capacity, as well as existing public health services and information and surveillance systems. The generation of up-to-date, context-specific knowledge is needed to inform and monitor political decisions related to the protection of nurses, and the improvement of their employment conditions, as well as to strengthen accountability for these areas at various levels.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.