ArticleHeliyon2024
Work engagement and sense of coherence as predictors of psychological distress during the first phase of the COVID-19 pandemic in Chile.
Article in Heliyon, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: The aim of this study was to analyse the relationship between sense of coherence, work engagement, and work environment variables as predictors of the level of psychological distress during the first phase of the COVID-19 pandemic in Chile. Methods: Cross-sectional descriptive study collected between April 22 and December 16, 2020, using non-probabilistic snowball sampling. The study variables and instruments were socio-demographic variables, work engagement (UWES-9 scale), sense of coherence (Antonovsky SOC-13 scale), and psychological distress (GHQ-12 scale). Multivariate analysis and binary logistic regression were performed including the scores of the three questionnaires and other variables such as effectiveness, safety, stress, health perception, and sex. Finally, the CHAID technique was applied to create a segmentation tree. Results: 72.7 % of participants had high levels of psychological distress, more predominantly among women, with work stress and low sense of coherence acting as the most influential mediators in generating psychological distress, and even more so when both were combined. Low work engagement and the availability of safe and effective means to prevent infection were predictors of psychological distress among workers. Conclusion: During the first phase of the COVID-19 pandemic, factors that contributed to psychological distress in the Chilean population were identified. These included a fair or poor perception of health, being a woman, work-related stress, availability of safety measures, low level of work engagement, and low level of sense of coherence. Identifying these factors may help prevent similar effects in future phases of the current pandemic or in future pandemics.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.