ArticleFrontiers in public health2024
Psychological distress among Brazilian workers during the initial stage of the COVID-19 pandemic: a descriptive study.
Article in Frontiers in public health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Sense of coherence in Spanish-speaking countries during the COVID-19 pandemic: A systematic review.Medicine · 2024Pooled it
- Workers' Psychological Distress During the Early Months of the COVID-19 Pandemic in Brazil: A Cross-Sectional Study.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: COVID-19 pandemic imposed drastic and abrupt changes to working environment and organization and that might have caused additional negative effects on mental health. Thus, this study aimed to quantify and assess the severity of psychological distress experienced by Brazilian essential and nonessential workers during the first months of the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: This descriptive study included 2,903 participants who answered an online questionnaire between April and May 2020. The research questionnaire was translated and culturally adapted to the Brazilian population from a questionnaire developed and validated for the Spanish population. Variables were analyzed using simple and cumulative percentage distributions and measures of central tendency and dispersion. The Wilson score interval was used to calculate confidence interval (CI) for the main outcome, psychological distress. Results: It was observed a high prevalence (72.6%) of psychological distress among the study's participants. They also presented a median risk perception score of 60 (out of a maximum of 90), and their greatest concern was transmitting the virus to family members, close contacts or patients. Furthermore, it was found a lower sense of coherence and work engagement among the participants than those observed in previous studies conducted in other countries. Conclusion: Almost three quarters of the study's participants were classified as presenting psychological distress. Thus, it is imperative to provide mental health remotely delivered interventions to workers during public health events that require prolonged social distancing measures.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.