Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35683594›Full record

ReviewJournal of clinical medicine2022

Psychological Interventions in a Pandemic Emergency: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of SARS-CoV-2 Studies.

Grazia D'Onofrio, Nicoletta Trotta, Melania Severo, Salvatore Iuso, Filomena Ciccone, Anna Maria Prencipe, Seyed Mohammad Nabavi, Gabriella De Vincentis, Annamaria Petito

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of clinical medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 17% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. On the Waves of the COVID-19 Pandemic.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023
    Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Grazia D'OnofrioClinical Psychology Service, Health Department, Fondazione IRCCS Casa Sollievo della Sofferenza, San Giovanni Rotondo, 71013 Foggia, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-5905-6063
Nicoletta TrottaDepartment of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, University of Foggia, 71122 Foggia, Italy.
Melania SeveroDepartment of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, University of Foggia, 71122 Foggia, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-1929-497X
Salvatore IusoDepartment of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, University of Foggia, 71122 Foggia, Italy.
Filomena CicconeClinical Psychology Service, Health Department, Fondazione IRCCS Casa Sollievo della Sofferenza, San Giovanni Rotondo, 71013 Foggia, Italy.
Anna Maria PrencipeClinical Psychology Service, Health Department, Fondazione IRCCS Casa Sollievo della Sofferenza, San Giovanni Rotondo, 71013 Foggia, Italy.
Seyed Mohammad NabaviAdvanced Medical Pharma (BIOTEC), 82100 Benevento, Italy.
Gabriella De VincentisHealth Department, Fondazione IRCCS Casa Sollievo della Sofferenza, San Giovanni Rotondo, 71013 Foggia, Italy.
Annamaria PetitoDepartment of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, University of Foggia, 71122 Foggia, Italy.ORCID 0000-0001-7788-3591
Casa Sollievo della Sofferenza · ITUniversity of Foggia · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: The study aim was to review the evidence and effectiveness of psychological interventions applied during Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic. Methods: A literature search was run from April 2020 to April 2021. The inclusion criteria were: (1) RCTs or observational studies; (2) professional health carers and patients who had contracted coronavirus during the pandemic; (3) adults and elderly people with a viral infection diagnosis; (4) suitable measures to assess intervention effectiveness on clinical status and psychological and behavioral aspects. An internal validity assessment was planned using robvis. Data were synthesized according to PICO criteria. Results: A total of 12 studies were selected. Studies measuring mental health outcomes demonstrated the greatest reduction in symptoms, with eight out of the twelve studies demonstrating a reduction in symptoms that reached statistical significance (p < 0.05) and four of the studies reaching a higher significance level of p < 0.01. The type of psychological intervention was predominantly cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT). All studies except one was run online. Conclusion: Psychological interventions have a benefit on mental health outcomes, even if performed online. In particular, CBT seems to be the psychological intervention that is used more and also seems to have a larger effect size on the mitigation of mental health symptoms and increasing resilience.

Indexed as

anxietydepressionpsychological treatmentresilienceviral infection

Identifiers

PMID35683594
PMCPMC9181132
OpenAlexW4281713719

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 Socratic graph.