ArticleBMC psychology2025
Understanding loneliness and depression in psychiatry professionals: insights from a national survey of trainees and practitioners.
Article in BMC psychology, 2025. 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis research investigated the prevalence of loneliness and its associated factors. These included depression and attitudes towards social support and work among psychiatry trainees as well as practitioners.
methodsFrom January to February 2023, this cross-sectional study used an online survey to gather data from Thai psychiatry trainees and psychiatrists. The survey included: demographic and work-related questions, assessments of social support and work perceptions; the Revised UCLA Loneliness Scale (Thai version), and the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9, Thai version). Descriptive statistics were used for initial analysis, while multiple logistic regression was employed to identify loneliness-associated factors.
resultsOut of 225 participants, 52 were psychiatry trainees (23.1%), and 173 were psychiatrists (76.9%); with a median age of 34 years (interquartile range: 30-42). The survey revealed that 15.6% of participants experienced high levels of loneliness, with 9.6% of trainees and 17.3% of psychiatrists reporting this condition. No statistically significant differences in loneliness levels between trainees and practitioners were found. Multivariate analysis indicated that higher loneliness was linked to less control over work schedules and lower levels of family support.
conclusionsAddressing factors, such as control over work schedules and family support, could be crucial in mitigating loneliness among mental health professionals.
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.