ArticleRevista Cuidarte
Contribution of nursing research to fighting against COVID-19 pandemic. A systematic review.
Article in Revista Cuidarte. 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.
- Knowledge, attitudes, prevention and opinion of nursing professionals regarding COVID-19: analytical study.Revista latino-americana de enfermagem · 2025Article
- Contribution of nursing research to fighting against COVID-19 pandemic. A systematic review.Revista CuidarteArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: The 2019 coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic, should be an opportunity to ensure greater visibility of nursing in health systems and society worldwide. Objective: Review and synthesize the patterns on COVID-19 and nursing research, identifying the main journals, country of origin, language, topics, designs, and area of applicability of the results. Materials and Methods: Systematic review. Searches in PubMed, CINAHL, LILACS, and EMBASE databases (from the inception of the pandemic to May 15, 2020) were performed. Articles of any language related were related to SARS-CoV-2 infection or COVID-19 disease and nursing in any of its roles (care, management, education, among others) and using any epidemiological design or a scientific report were included. Two reviewers independently selected the studies and extracted the data. The main findings from the included studies were summarized through narrative synthesis and descriptive tables. The characteristics of the studies were presented as absolute values and proportions. Results: Three hundred and sixty-five articles were assessed for eligibility. Thirty-eight were included, published in 28 journals. Of those, 53.57% (n=15) were nursing specific. Most articles were "narrative reviews", accounting for 23.68% (n=9). Most studies were conducted in China (n=18, 47.37%), followed by the United Kingdom and the United States. Thirty-four (89.47%) articles were published in English, followed by Portuguese and Chinese. We identified five areas of application of the results, and the most frequent was the "clinical" setting with 47.00% (n=18). Discussion: These findings are crucial to give visibility to nursing work during the emergency of the COVID-19 pandemic. Mental health was the main research topic, while the clinical setting concentrates the major number of articles. This pattern was aligned with the challenges of the initial phase of the pandemic. Conclusion: Future research should explore the current state of evidence in the main topics identified in this review and continue to give visibility to work carried out by nursing in the emergency of the COVID-19 pandemic.
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.