ArticleLa Tunisie medicale
Psychosocial impact of COVID-19 among health workers in Algeria.
Article in La Tunisie medicale. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Epidemiology and psychosocial assessment of COVID-19 among workers of the Nigeria Centre for Disease Control infected with COVID-19.Journal of public health in Africa · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe current COVID-19 pandemic has put health care professionals in the face of increasing psychological distress, with a high risk of infection. PURPOSE: To estimate the prevalence of anxiety-depressive disorders among health professionals in Algeria and determine their associated risk factors.
methodA cross-sectional descriptive study was conducted from January 11 to March 09, 2021 and concerned healthcare professionals in Algeria, through an online self-assessment. The mental health rating scales used were GAD-7 (7 items) for Anxiety, and CES-D (20 items) for Depression. Resilience was estimated by the RISC-CD (10 items). An original questionnaire was used to assess three factors: fear of infection and death, isolation and stigmatization, as well as motivation and escape behaviour at work.
resultsA total of 1005 health professionals were included in the study, of which 51.5% were doctors, 75.6% were women and 41.1% were at the first front of the fight against COVID-19. The prevalence of Anxiety and Depression was 23.8% and 44.6% respectively. Health professionals with a high resilience score were those who were in direct contact with COVID-19 3.75 [1.11-12.7] and those who feared contracting the disease 1.22 [1.14-1.31]. Among the study population, 508 employees (50.5%) were free from anxiety-depressive disorder: Good mental health of health personnel, has been determined by the male sex 1,55 [1,07, 2,24], without co-morbidity 0,57 [0,39, 0,83], without direct intervention in the fight against COVID-19 0.63 [0.45, 0.89], having a low score of Depression and Anxiety with respectively 0.43 [0.36- 0.50], 0.50 [0.41- 0.58] while denouncing a high Resilience score 1.03 [1.01- 1.05].
conclusionIn Algeria, the fight against the COVID-19 pandemic has had an impact on the mental health of health professionals, hence the urgent need for intervention programs, for strengthening their mental health in a more sustainable and effective struggle.
Indexed as
Identifiers
35288905PMC9390127W4287400497What 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.