Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35331261›Full record

ArticleHuman resources for health2022

Health care workers' experiences during the COVID-19 pandemic: a scoping review.

Souaad Chemali, Almudena Mari-Sáez, Charbel El Bcheraoui, Heide Weishaar

Open access · goldAbstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in Human resources for health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 110 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
110citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
43.4field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

110 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 237 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Exploring burnout: An online survey among diverse nursing teams in Germany.International journal of nursing studies advances · 2026
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Care Aides Compassion Fatigue, Burnout, and Compassion Satisfaction Related to Long-Term Care (LTC) Working Environment.Journal of applied gerontology : the official journal of the Southern Gerontological Society · 2026
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article

50 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Souaad ChemaliCentre for International Health Protection, Robert Koch Institute, Nordufer 20, 13353, Berlin, Germany.
Almudena Mari-SáezCentre for International Health Protection, Robert Koch Institute, Nordufer 20, 13353, Berlin, Germany.
Charbel El BcheraouiEvidence-Based Public Health, Centre for International Health Protection, Robert Koch Institute, Nordufer 20, 13353, Berlin, Germany.
Heide WeishaarEvidence-Based Public Health, Centre for International Health Protection, Robert Koch Institute, Nordufer 20, 13353, Berlin, Germany. weishaarh@rki.de.ORCID 0000-0003-1150-0265
Robert Koch Institute · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCOVID-19 has challenged health systems worldwide, especially the health workforce, a pillar crucial for health systems resilience. Therefore, strengthening health system resilience can be informed by analyzing health care workers' (HCWs) experiences and needs during pandemics. This review synthesizes qualitative studies published during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic to identify factors affecting HCWs' experiences and their support needs during the pandemic. This review was conducted using the Joanna Briggs Institute methodology for scoping reviews. A systematic search on PubMed was applied using controlled vocabularies. Only original studies presenting primary qualitative data were included.

results161 papers that were published from the beginning of COVID-19 pandemic up until 28th March 2021 were included in the review. Findings were presented using the socio-ecological model as an analytical framework. At the individual level, the impact of the pandemic manifested on HCWs' well-being, daily routine, professional and personal identity. At the interpersonal level, HCWs' personal and professional relationships were identified as crucial. At the institutional level, decision-making processes, organizational aspects and availability of support emerged as important factors affecting HCWs' experiences. At community level, community morale, norms, and public knowledge were of importance. Finally, at policy level, governmental support and response measures shaped HCWs' experiences. The review identified a lack of studies which investigate other HCWs than doctors and nurses, HCWs in non-hospital settings, and HCWs in low- and lower middle income countries. DISCUSSION: This review shows that the COVID-19 pandemic has challenged HCWs, with multiple contextual factors impacting their experiences and needs. To better understand HCWs' experiences, comparative investigations are needed which analyze differences across as well as within countries, including differences at institutional, community, interpersonal and individual levels. Similarly, interventions aimed at supporting HCWs prior to, during and after pandemics need to consider HCWs' circumstances.

conclusionsFollowing a context-sensitive approach to empowering HCWs that accounts for the multitude of aspects which influence their experiences could contribute to building a sustainable health workforce and strengthening health systems for future pandemics.

Indexed as

COVID-19Influenza, HumanAttitude of Health PersonnelHealth PersonnelHumansPandemicsCopingCOVID-19ExperiencesHealth care workersHealth systemsPandemicResilience

Identifiers

PMID35331261
PMCPMC8943506
OpenAlexW4221098874

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.