ArticlePLOS mental health2025
"We started to care for our colleagues": A qualitative study of statements by physicians and nurses from a COVID-19 ICU of a public university hospital in the Southeast region of Brazil.
Article in PLOS mental health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The COVID-19 pandemic triggered countless intense emotional experiences. The challenges posed by the unpredictability of this macro-phenomenon led to a "mass illness", with impacts on mental health, particularly among healthcare providers, who worked directly with hospitalized patients, tirelessly seeking their recovery. This study aimed to interpret the symbolic meanings of statements expressed by physicians and nurses of a COVID-19 intensive care unit to assess their care experiences. This was a humanistic study using the Clinical-Qualitative method (CQM). Data were interpreted using Clinical-Qualitative Content Analysis. Six interviews were performed, which produced the following categories: Category 1 -Psychic time and rudimentary symbolizations on personal experience during the pandemic; Category 2 -Denial as a psychological defense or a psychosocial adaptation mechanism? Category 3 -Tension and family support: triggers of ambivalent experiences; and 4: The feeling of insecurity: from technique to affective dimension. Our findings indicate rudimentary symbolization of experiences in an intense context such as the COVID-19 pandemic. The interviewees presented discursive speech, with poor symbolic expression, as the process for psychic and cultural representation requires time, unlike the chronology of facts that respects the order in which they happen.
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.