ReviewBJPsych open2025
Secondary stressors and their psychosocial impacts on healthcare staff: lessons from a qualitative systematic review from the COVID-19 pandemic in the UK.
Review in BJPsych open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundExtreme events (e.g. floods and disease outbreaks) can overwhelm healthcare workers (HCWs) and healthcare systems. During the COVID-19 pandemic, high levels of distress and mental ill health were reported by HCWs.
aimsTo examine and synthesise research findings reported in the qualitative literature regarding the stressors, and their psychosocial impacts, faced by HCWs in the UK during the COVID-19 pandemic, and to provide lessons for future support.
methodQualitative articles were identified in EMBASE and OVID (preregistered on PROSPERO: CRD42022304235). Studies were required to have been published between January 2021 and January 2022 and to have examined the impact of COVID-19 on UK HCWs. We included 27 articles that represented the experiences of 2640 HCWs, assessed their quality using National Institute for Health and Care Excellence criteria and integrated their findings using thematic synthesis.
resultsSeveral secondary stressors were identified, including lack of personal protective equipment, ineffective leadership and communication, high workloads and problems stemming from uncertainty and a lack of knowledge. Stressors were related to adverse psychosocial outcomes including worry, fatigue, lack of confidence in oneself and senior managers, impacts on teamwork and feeling unappreciated or that one's needs are not recognised.
conclusionsOur thematic synthesis moves beyond simply mapping stressors faced by HCWs by considering their antecedents, origins and psychosocial impacts. Utilising a theoretical framework that points towards systemic deficiencies, we argue that secondary stressors can be modified to remove their negative effects. Consequently, workforce planning should shift from focusing on individual change towards amending psychosocial environments in which HCWs work.
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.