SynthesisInternational journal of environmental research and public health2026
Interventions to Support the Mental Health of Frontline Healthcare Workers During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Systematic Review.
Synthesis in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2026. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The COVID-19 pandemic led to distress and an increased prevalence of psychopathology among front-line (FL) healthcare workers (HCWs). A synthesis of the available data on the effectiveness of MH interventions among FL HCWs is essential to inform an MH plan for FL HCWs in future pandemics. The objective of this systematic review is to examine interventions used to support the MH of FL HCWs during the COVID-19 pandemic. All studies published between 1 January 2020 and 1 March 2026 that reported on MH interventions among FL HCWs during the COVID-19 pandemic were identified using PubMed, PsycINFO, Scopus, EMBASE, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Google Scholar, Medline, and Web of Science. Studies published in peer-reviewed journals that reported data on interventions to support the MH of FL HCWs were included. The study was conducted using the approach by the PRISMA guidelines. The search generated 1450 records, of which 309 were reviewed at length, and 153 studies (N = 153) were included. Interventions in these studies included identification of risk for psychopathology and linkage to mental health care (n = 3), PE/PFA (n = 44), psychotherapy (n = 26), mindfulness programs (n = 58), medications (n = 5), and multiple/combined psychosocial support interventions (n = 17). The majority of studies found their interventions to be beneficial, largely based on user satisfaction scores and symptom screening scores. Importantly, symptoms in the vast majority of control arms also improved over time, though not to the degree that symptoms in intervention arms improved. This systematic review suggests that an established disaster MH response framework may be useful in directing the design of MH responses to FL HCWs in future pandemics, offering screening for psychopathology and connection with formal psychiatric services for full evaluation and provision of MH care, as well as supportive care with mindfulness interventions, crisis-oriented counseling, PE, and PFA.
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.