Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37191933›Full record

SynthesisWiener medizinische Wochenschrift (1946)2024

Psychosocial interventions for healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic: rapid review and meta-analysis.

Manuela Hoedl, Selvedina Osmancevic, Nina Thonhofer, Lea Reiter, Daniela Schoberer

Open access · hybridAbstract readMeta-AnalysisReview
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Wiener medizinische Wochenschrift (1946), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 13% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. 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

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Manuela HoedlInstitute of Nursing Science, Medical University of Graz, Universitaetsplatz 4/3, 8010, Graz, Austria. manuela.hoedl@medunigraz.at.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9829-2766
Selvedina OsmancevicInstitute of Nursing Science, Medical University of Graz, Universitaetsplatz 4/3, 8010, Graz, Austria.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6085-6017
Nina ThonhoferInstitute of Nursing Science, Medical University of Graz, Universitaetsplatz 4/3, 8010, Graz, Austria.
Lea ReiterInstitute of Nursing Science, Medical University of Graz, Universitaetsplatz 4/3, 8010, Graz, Austria.
Daniela SchobererInstitute of Nursing Science, Medical University of Graz, Universitaetsplatz 4/3, 8010, Graz, Austria.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9831-0570
Medical University of Graz · AT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This rapid review was conducted by following a predefined protocol developed by the Cochrane Rapid Reviews Methods Group. A total of 172 potential reviews and 167 primary studies of interest were found. AMSTAR II was used to assess the quality of the included reviews and the JBI Checklist for Randomized Controlled Trials for primary studies. Overall, four studies were included in this review. The study quality ranged from 5 to 12 out of 13 possible stars. No robust evidence was found that psychosocial interventions can reduce psychological distress. No significant effect could be found regarding post-traumatic stress. Two studies on anxiety were identified, one which showed an effect and another which did not. The psychosocial intervention had no beneficial effect on burnout and depression, whereas providing a mindfulness- or relaxation-based intervention resulted in a significant improvement in sleep quality. By considering the secondary results and results of previous reviews, a combination of training and mindfulness seems to be beneficial for decreasing anxiety and stress in home care workers. In summary, the evidence-based recommendations are still limited and, therefore, more evidence is needed to make a general statement of high certainty about the effects.

Indexed as

COVID-19AnxietyHealth PersonnelHumansPandemicsPsychosocial InterventionMental healthOccupational healthPandemicSARS-Cov-2Stress

Identifiers

PMID37191933
PMCPMC10185947
OpenAlexW4376641293

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.