ArticleScientific reports2024
COVID-19 and mental distress among health professionals in eight European countries during the third wave: a cross-sectional survey.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Psychometric validation of a cognition and social participation bolt-on for the EQ-5D-5L in SARS-CoV-2 infected German healthcare workers.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2026Article
- Article
- Elevated levels of mental health issues among optometrists in the United Kingdom.Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians (Optometrists) · 2025Article
- Occupational stress and social support among nurses.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- Course of well-being and mental health in Switzerland during the COVID-19 pandemic: results of a national survey within the framework of the COH-FIT study.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Even during the third wave of the COVID-19 pandemic health professionals were facing mental health challenges. The aim of this study was to examine the mental health of doctors, nurses and other professional groups in Europe and to identify differences between the professional groups. We conducted a cross-sectional online survey in 8 European countries. We asked for demographic data, whether the participants were exposed to COVID-19 at work, for main information sources about the pandemic, the Depression Anxiety Stress Scales (DASS-21), and major stressors. A MANCOVA was carried out to find predictors of mental health among health care professionals. The sample (N = 1398) consisted of 237 physicians, 459 nurses, and 351 other healthcare professionals and 351 non-medical professionals with no direct involvement in patient care. The mean mental health of all groups was affected to a mild degree. Major predictors for depression and anxiety were the profession group with higher scores especially in the group of the nurses and working directly with COVID-patients. In the third wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, the psychological burden on health professionals has remained high, with being nurse and working directly with COVID19 patients being particular risk factors for mental distress. We found as a main result that nurses scored significantly higher on depression and anxiety than practitioners.
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.