ArticleThe Indian journal of medical research2024
COVID-19 pandemic & neurosciences in India- the CoINstudy: Impact of the pandemic on research related to the neurosciences.
Article in The Indian journal of medical research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
- Building Disaster-Ready Research Ecosystems: Evidence from Doctoral Scholars from Tertiary Care Institute in India.Juntendo medical journal · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
17 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background & objectives We aimed to assess the impact of COVID-19-related disruptions on ongoing and future projects related to neuroscience research and young researchers in India. Methods We conducted a countrywide online survey using a structured, self-administered questionnaire involving medical trainees, post-doctoral fellows, PhD students, early career faculty members and basic neuroscience researchers. The purpose was to assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the respondents' ongoing/planned research activities and capture their concerns related to future research. Results Five hundred and four valid responses were analyzed. More than three-fourths of the respondents were in their early careers - 64.1 per cent were resident doctors, and 19.8 per cent were early career consultants. Maximum responses were received from respondents working in neurology (228; 45.2%), followed by psychiatry (192; 38.1%) and neurosurgery (49; 9.7%). More than three-fourths [83.5%, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.8-0.867] of the respondents reported that the pandemic had affected their research. About one-third of the respondents (171; 33.9%) reported delays in completing research studies. Respondents adapted to the pandemic's circumstances by making methodological changes in their research (155; 30.8%). Most respondents (301; 59.6%) reported being diverted from their traditional work settings to COVID-19-related clinical services. Respondents conducting prospective studies and randomized controlled trials and those diverted to COVID-related services were significantly more likely to report the adverse research impact. Interpretation & conclusions In our survey, an overwhelming majority of the respondents reported that the pandemic adversely impacted their study. This trend was independent of sex, designation, and research output of individual subjects. The serious impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on neurosciences research warrants the attention and concerted efforts of the research supervisors, institutional heads, funding agencies and other stakeholders.
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.