Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36829158›Full record

SynthesisHuman resources for health2023

Health worker education during the COVID-19 pandemic: global disruption, responses and lessons for the future-a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Aikaterini Dedeilia, Michail Papapanou, Andreas N Papadopoulos, Nina-Rafailia Karela, Anastasia Androutsou, Dimitra Mitsopoulou, Melina Nikolakea, Christos Konstantinidis, Manthia Papageorgakopoulou, Michail Sideris and 5 more

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Human resources for health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

23 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Professional Training by Perinatal Psychiatry Access Programs: Multi-Method Approach to Characterize the State of the US Access Programs.Academic psychiatry : the journal of the American Association of Directors of Psychiatric Residency Training and the Association for Academic Psychiatry · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Innovation and Competency Development in Occupational Therapy Fieldwork During the COVID-19 Pandemic.Canadian journal of occupational therapy. Revue canadienne d'ergotherapie · 2024
    Article
  20. EFAS/EAN survey on the influence of the COVID-19 pandemic on European clinical autonomic education and research.Clinical autonomic research : official journal of the Clinical Autonomic Research Society · 2023
    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

15 authors.

Aikaterini DedeiliaDepartment of Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
Michail Papapanou *HEALth Workforce Education (HEAL-Edu) Study Group, Athens, Greece.
Andreas N Papadopoulos *HEALth Workforce Education (HEAL-Edu) Study Group, Athens, Greece.
Nina-Rafailia KarelaHEALth Workforce Education (HEAL-Edu) Study Group, Athens, Greece.
Anastasia AndroutsouHEALth Workforce Education (HEAL-Edu) Study Group, Athens, Greece.
Dimitra MitsopoulouHEALth Workforce Education (HEAL-Edu) Study Group, Athens, Greece.
Melina NikolakeaHEALth Workforce Education (HEAL-Edu) Study Group, Athens, Greece.
Christos KonstantinidisHEALth Workforce Education (HEAL-Edu) Study Group, Athens, Greece.
Manthia PapageorgakopoulouHEALth Workforce Education (HEAL-Edu) Study Group, Athens, Greece.
Michail SiderisBarts and the London School of Medicine and Dentistry, Queen Mary University of London, London, United Kingdom.
Elizabeth O JohnsonSchool of Medicine, European University Cyprus, Nicosia, Cyprus.
Siobhan FitzpatrickHealth Workforce Department, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland.
Giorgio ComettoHealth Workforce Department, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland.
Jim CampbellHealth Workforce Department, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland.
Marinos G SotiropoulosHarvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA. msotiropoulos@bwh.harvard.edu.ORCID 0000-0002-3032-7069

Funding

World Health Organization 001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThis systematic review and meta-analysis identified early evidence quantifying the disruption to the education of health workers by the COVID-19 pandemic, ensuing policy responses and their outcomes.

methodsFollowing a pre-registered protocol and PRISMA/AMSTAR-2 guidelines, we systematically screened MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, CENTRAL, clinicaltrials.gov and Google Scholar from January 2020 to July 2022. We pooled proportion estimates via random-effects meta-analyses and explored subgroup differences by gender, occupational group, training stage, WHO regions/continents, and study end-year. We assessed risk of bias (Newcastle-Ottawa scale for observational studies, RοB2 for randomized controlled trials [RCT]) and rated evidence certainty using GRADE.

resultsOf the 171 489 publications screened, 2 249 were eligible, incorporating 2 212 observational studies and 37 RCTs, representing feedback from 1 109 818 learners and 22 204 faculty. The sample mostly consisted of undergraduates, medical doctors, and studies from institutions in Asia. Perceived training disruption was estimated at 71.1% (95% confidence interval 67.9-74.2) and learner redeployment at 29.2% (25.3-33.2). About one in three learners screened positive for anxiety (32.3%, 28.5-36.2), depression (32.0%, 27.9-36.2), burnout (38.8%, 33.4-44.3) or insomnia (30.9%, 20.8-41.9). Policy responses included shifting to online learning, innovations in assessment, COVID-19-specific courses, volunteerism, and measures for learner safety. For outcomes of policy responses, most of the literature related to perceptions and preferences. More than two-thirds of learners (75.9%, 74.2-77.7) were satisfied with online learning (postgraduates more than undergraduates), while faculty satisfaction rate was slightly lower (71.8%, 66.7-76.7). Learners preferred an in-person component: blended learning 56.0% (51.2-60.7), face-to-face 48.8% (45.4-52.1), and online-only 32.0% (29.3-34.8). They supported continuation of the virtual format as part of a blended system (68.1%, 64.6-71.5). Subgroup differences provided valuable insights despite not resolving the considerable heterogeneity. All outcomes were assessed as very-low-certainty evidence.

conclusionThe COVID-19 pandemic has severely disrupted health worker education, inflicting a substantial mental health burden on learners. Its impacts on career choices, volunteerism, pedagogical approaches and mental health of learners have implications for educational design, measures to protect and support learners, faculty and health workers, and workforce planning. Online learning may achieve learner satisfaction as part of a short-term solution or integrated into a blended model in the post-pandemic future.

Indexed as

COVID-19AsiaHealth PersonnelHumansPandemicsAssessmentCOVID-19DisruptionEducationHealthcare workerHealth workerMental healthOnline learningPandemicTrainingVolunteering

Identifiers

PMID36829158
PMCPMC9951171

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.