ArticlePLOS global public health2026
Comparing the psychosocial impacts of COVID-19 in seven low- and middle-income countries: A cross-sectional study.
Article in PLOS global public health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05052333 (An International Study Examining the Psychosocial Impacts of COVID-19 Pandemic.), which is not on this 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.
An International Study Examining the Psychosocial Impacts of COVID-19 Pandemic.
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
32 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The COVID-19 pandemic inflicted widespread and prolonged stress, particularly in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Similar events are likely in the future, and understanding moderators of the effects in LMICs may be helpful. An observational study of adults aged ≥18 years in Türkiye, Indonesia, Iraq, Malaysia, Pakistan, Somaliland, and Iran was conducted using an online survey between 2021 and 2023. Data were collected on sociodemographic and pandemic-related variables along with standardized measures of psychological distress (Kessler Psychological Distress Scale 10, K10; Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Checklist for DSM-5, PCL5), wellbeing (World Health Organization-Five Well-Being Index, WHO-5), post-traumatic growth (Posttraumatic Growth Inventory, PTGI), and pandemic-related distress (COVID-19 Psychosocial Impacts Scale, CPIS). Modified Poisson multilevel mixed-effect models were used to explore associations. Cumulative distribution function plots were used to visually compare sites, followed by ANCOVA to assess statistical differences while controlling for covariates. Overall, 2,574 adults aged 18-73 years (M = 28.0 years, SD = 10.6) participated. They were predominantly female (64.6%), single (58.0%), and Muslim (92.2%), with 81.2% having at least a tertiary qualification. The CPIS score range was 5-144 (M = 47.7, SD = 24.0). Psychological outcomes revealed substantial distress on K10 (32.2%), PCL5 (37.8%), and WHO-5 (45.0%) measures. Being female, married, studying full-time, and unemployed were consistently linked to higher psychological distress. The PTGI scores ranged from 0-105 (M = 53.3, SD = 23.3), showing a wide spectrum of posttraumatic growth in responses to COVID-19. Country-wise comparisons indicated variations in distress, well-being, and post-traumatic growth in response to COVID-19. The variation in distress scores appeared to be influenced by individual (e.g., gender, marital status, education, employment) and contextual (e.g., lockdown) factors. These findings suggest that strategies aimed at mitigating long-term psychosocial impacts of pandemics in resource-constrained settings may have population-health beneficial. Registration details: The study is registered with the Clinical Trial Registry (NCT05052333).
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.