Predictors and rates of PTSD, depression and anxiety in UK frontline health and social care workers during COVID-19
This article has been Reviewed by the following groups
Listed in
- Evaluated articles (ScreenIT)
Abstract
Article activity feed
-
-
-
SciScore for 10.1101/2020.10.21.20216804: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Institutional Review Board Statement Consent: Participants gave informed consent online before proceeding to the questionnaire.
IRB: Ethical approval for the Frontline-COVID study was granted by the UCL Ethics Committee.Randomization not detected. Blinding not detected. Power Analysis not detected. Sex as a biological variable not detected. 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:There are some limitations to this study. Although the …
SciScore for 10.1101/2020.10.21.20216804: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Institutional Review Board Statement Consent: Participants gave informed consent online before proceeding to the questionnaire.
IRB: Ethical approval for the Frontline-COVID study was granted by the UCL Ethics Committee.Randomization not detected. Blinding not detected. Power Analysis not detected. Sex as a biological variable not detected. 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:There are some limitations to this study. Although the sample was reasonably large, it was a convenience sample recruited through social media, and therefore is vulnerable to self-selection bias. Thus, it is not a representative sample, and prevalence estimates for the whole HSCW population in the UK should not be derived from this study. Second, the questionnaires were self-report, rather than standardised clinician-administered diagnostic interviews. Third, we were not able to include other occupational groups in the comparisons due to the small numbers of participants in each group. Finally, although this is part of a longitudinal study for which data are currently being collected, the current paper reports only on the first wave of this study, therefore it is not possible to draw conclusions as to the direction of these relationships. Clinical implications: This study found evidence of high levels of distress among the participants. While these rates may be over-estimates, they are indicative of clinically significant need. For many, this acute distress will naturally resolve and should not be pathologised (Billings, Greene, et al., 2020; Lamb, Greenberg, Stevelink, & Wessely, 2020). Furthermore, there is a temptation to rush to put in place formal interventions, yet for many HSCWs this will not be necessary. Nevertheless, for some frontline HSCWs, their distress and other symptoms will be severe and have the potential to become chronic. These cases need to be detected ea...
Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.
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.
-