Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35963061›Full record

ReviewPsychiatry research2022

Communicating and reading emotion with masked faces in the Covid era: A short review of the literature.

Celine Ramdani, Michael Ogier, Antoine Coutrot

Open access · hybridAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Psychiatry research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.4field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 30 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. WHO'Frontiers in public health · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. 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

3 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Celine RamdaniFrench Armed Forces Biomedical Research Institute, Bretigny sur Orge, France. Electronic address: celineramdani@hotmail.fr.
Michael OgierFrench Armed Forces Biomedical Research Institute, Bretigny sur Orge, France.
Antoine CoutrotLIRIS - CNRS - Université de Lyon, France.
Biomedical Research Institute · USInstitut de Médecine Tropicale du Service de Santé des Armées · FRUniversité Claude Bernard Lyon 1 · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Face masks have proven to be key to slowing down the SARS-Cov2 virus spread in the COVID-19 pandemic context. However, wearing face masks is not devoid of "side-effects", at both the physical and psychosocial levels. In particular, masks hinder emotion reading from facial expressions as they hide a significant part of the face. This disturbs both holistic and featural processing of facial expressions and, therefore, impairs emotion recognition, and influences many aspects of human social behavior. Communication in general is disrupted by face masks, as they modify the wearer's voice and prevent the audience from using lip reading or other non-verbal cues for speech comprehension. Individuals suffering from psychiatric conditions with impairment of communication, are at higher risk of distress because masks increase their difficulties to read emotions from faces. The identification and acknowledgement of these "side-effects" on communication are necessary because they warrant further work on adaptive solutions that will help foster the use of face masks by the greatest number.

Indexed as

COVID-19PandemicsEmotionsHumansRNA, ViralSARS-CoV-2RNA, ViralCovid-19Emotion readingMask wearingNonverbal communication

Identifiers

PMID35963061
PMCPMC9338224
OpenAlexW4288760258

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.