ArticleBMJ open2025
Demographic, occupational factors and pandemic-related stressors associated with heightened mental health difficulties among UK health and social care workers supported by regional Resilience Hubs during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Article in BMJ open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Patients seeking occupational health advice before and after COVID-19.Occupational medicine (Oxford, England) · 2026Article
- Psychological and relational adjustment under stress: the mediating role of emotion regulation in parents' functioning during the COVID-19 crisis.Frontiers in psychology · 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
24 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDuring the COVID-19 pandemic, 40 mental health and well-being hubs were funded in England to support health and social care staff affected by the pandemic.
aimsTo describe the characteristics of staff accessing four hubs for support and identify characteristics associated with clinically significant mental health difficulties and work and social functioning.
methodRoutinely collected screening data were analysed from 1973 individuals across 4 hubs, including mental health, demographic and occupational data and pandemic-related stressors. Factors associated with clinically significant mental health difficulties were identified via logistic regression.
resultsMost hub clients identified as white women who worked for the UK National Health Service; other groups were less well represented. Hub clients reported high levels of clinically significant mental health difficulties: 60% had severe and often co-occurring difficulties (ie, depression, anxiety, post-traumatic stress disorder or alcohol use) and 80% reported significantly impaired functioning. Younger age, disability status, identifying as from a minority ethnic group, and sexual orientations excluding heterosexual were associated with higher likelihood of having clinically significant mental health difficulties. Suffering financial loss during the pandemic, and prepandemic emotional well-being concerns were the most consistent factors associated with higher difficulties.
conclusionsThe hubs supported health and social care staff with significant mental health difficulties. Outreach and engagement with under-represented groups should be undertaken to address potential barriers to service access. The findings add to the knowledge base on the support needs of the health and social care workforce and the planning of support in response to future crises.
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.