Mental health impact of the first wave of COVID-19 pandemic on Spanish healthcare workers: A large cross-sectional survey

This article has been Reviewed by the following groups

Read the full article

Abstract

No abstract available

Article activity feed

  1. SciScore for 10.1101/2020.10.27.20220731: (What is this?)

    Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.

    Table 1: Rigor

    Institutional Review Board StatementConsent: Informed consent was obtained from all participants at the first survey page.
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.
    Sex as a biological variableOf them, an additional n = 8 respondents were not included because they did not identify themselves with neither male nor female gender.

    Table 2: Resources

    No key resources detected.


    Results from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did not detect open code. Researchers are encouraged to share open data when possible (see Nature blog).


    Results from LimitationRecognizer: We detected the following sentences addressing limitations in the study:
    Strengths and limitations: Strengths of our study include the large number of institutions included and their spread over the most affected regions of Spain; the use of the institutional mailing lists as the sampling framework, which provided specific and reliable listing of healthcare workers; data representative of a large number of healthcare workers; and the higher validity of screening of symptoms with severe interference to identify disabling mental disorders. These strengths support the robustness and relevance of our results. Nevertheless, the study has some limitations that deserve careful consideration. First, we had a low response rate. Despite important advantages of institutional email listings, these email accounts seem not to be checked by a large majority of employees and their utilization might differ by professional category. In fact, in our study we could assess the proportion of workers who read their first email invitation, which was less than 27%. In addition, invitations were limited to a maximum of 2 due to institutional requirements. However, in order to improve representativeness, we have carefully weighted the observed data as to exactly reproduce the gender, age and professional category distribution of healthcare personnel in each participating institution. Second, the study was cross-sectional in nature and it cannot be used to infer any causal impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the mental health of healthcare workers. Nevertheless, we used clear...

    Results from TrialIdentifier: We found the following clinical trial numbers in your paper:

    IdentifierStatusTitle
    NCT04556565RecruitingMIND/COVID-19: Mental Health Impact and NeeDs Associated Wit…


    Results from Barzooka: We did not find any issues relating to the usage of bar graphs.


    Results from JetFighter: We did not find any issues relating to colormaps.


    Results from rtransparent:
    • Thank you for including a conflict of interest statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • Thank you for including a funding statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • No protocol registration statement was detected.

    About SciScore

    SciScore is an automated tool that is designed to assist expert reviewers by finding and presenting formulaic information scattered throughout a paper in a standard, easy to digest format. SciScore checks for the presence and correctness of RRIDs (research resource identifiers), and for rigor criteria such as sex and investigator blinding. For details on the theoretical underpinning of rigor criteria and the tools shown here, including references cited, please follow this link.