Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36476064›Full record

SynthesisTherapeutic advances in respiratory disease

Psychological stress and coping strategies among frontline healthcare workers supporting patients with coronavirus disease 2019: a retrospective study and literature review.

Xingyu Ding, Zihong Jian, Yiming Xu, Zibei Lin, Ziyang Chen, Yixian Zhang, Huayao Huang, Ronghua Chen, Pincang Xia, Wei Zhang and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Therapeutic advances in respiratory disease. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 19% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Hardship, coping, and joy: ACPs' experiences of working through the COVID-19 pandemic.International journal of qualitative studies on health and well-being · 2025
    Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

11 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Xingyu DingThe Third Clinical Medical College, Fujian Medical University, Fuzhou, China.
Zihong JianDepartment of Stomatology, Fujian Medical University, Fuzhou, China.
Yiming XuThe Third Clinical Medical College, Fujian Medical University, Fuzhou, China.
Zibei LinThe First Clinical Medical College, Fujian Medical University, Fuzhou, China.
Ziyang ChenThe Second Clinical Medical College, Fujian Medical University, Fuzhou, China.
Yixian ZhangDepartment of Rehabilitation, Fujian Medical University Union Hospital, Fuzhou, China.
Huayao HuangDepartment of Rehabilitation, Fujian Medical University Union Hospital, Fuzhou, China.
Ronghua ChenDepartment of Neurology, Fujian Medical University Union Hospital, Fuzhou, China.
Pincang XiaFujian Center for Disease Control and Prevention, Fuzhou, China.
Wei ZhangDepartment of Neurology, Fujian Medical University Union Hospital, 29 Xinquan Road, Gulou District, Fuzhou, China.
Houwei DuDepartment of Neurology, Fujian Medical University Union Hospital, 29 Xinquan Road, Gulou District, Fuzhou, China.ORCID 0000-0002-5978-9734
Fujian Medical University · CNGansu Provincial Center for Disease Control and Prevention · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak might have a psychological impact on frontline healthcare workers. However, the effectiveness of coping strategies was less reported.

objectivesWe aimed to investigate the sources of stress and coping strategies among frontline healthcare workers fighting against COVID-19. We also performed a literature review regarding the effects of coping methods on psychological health in this population.

methodsWe included frontline healthcare workers who completed an online survey using self-made psychological stress questionnaires in a cross-sectional study. We evaluated the association between potential factors and high-stressed status using a logistic regression model. We performed the principal component analysis with varimax rotation for factor analysis. We also performed a systematic review of published randomized controlled studies that reported the effects of coping methods on psychological health in COVID-19 healthcare workers.

resultsWe included 107 [32 (29-36) years] respondents in the final analysis, with a response rate of 80.5%. A total of 41 (38.3%) respondents were high-stressed. Compared with the low-stressed respondents, those with high-stress were less likely to be male (46.3%

conclusionOur findings suggest that some frontline healthcare workers experienced psychological stress during the early pandemic. Effective coping strategies are required to help relieve the stress in this population.

Indexed as

COVID-19Cross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHealth PersonnelHumansMalePandemicsRetrospective StudiesStress, Psychologicalcoping strategiescoronavirus disease 2019frontline healthcare workermental healthstress

Identifiers

PMID36476064
PMCPMC9742697
OpenAlexW4311587521

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.