Dataset Information

Psychological resilience during COVID-19: a meta-review protocol.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

The global COVID-19 pandemic continues to have wide-ranging implications for health, including psychological well-being. A growing corpus of research reviews has emerged on the topic of psychological resilience in the context of the pandemic. However, this body of work has not been systematically reviewed for its quality, nor with respect to findings on the effectiveness of tools and strategies for psychological resilience. To this end, a meta-review protocol is proposed with the following objectives: (1) identify review work on the topic of psychological resilience during COVID-19; (2) assess the quality of this review work using A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews; (3) assess the risk of bias in this work; (4) generate a narrative summary of the key points, strengths and weaknesses; (5) identify the psychological resilience strategies that have been reviewed; (6) identify how these strategies have been evaluated for their effectiveness; (7) identify what outcomes were measured and (8) summarise the findings on strategies for psychological resilience so far, providing recommendations, if possible.

Methods and analysis

A systematic meta-review will be conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews for Protocols and Joanna Briggs Institute umbrella review guidelines. Electronic searches of general databases, especially Web of Science, Scopus and PubMed, will be conducted. Only results from January 2020 onwards will be considered, coinciding with the COVID-19 pandemic. Only results in English will be included. Descriptive statistics, thematic analysis and narrative summaries describing the nature of the reviewed work and evaluation of psychological resilience strategies will be carried out.

Ethics and dissemination

Ethical approval is not needed for systematic review protocols. The results of the meta-review will be published in an international peer-reviewed journal. The raw and summarised data will be shared in the journal or other open venues.

Prospero registration number

CRD42021235288.

SUBMITTER: Seaborn K

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8214992 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundResilience, a person's ability to adapt to adverse events, is associated with positive outcomes, especially in the field of healthcare. Research into the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic may help to understand and combat the long-term mental health burden for trainees in health care.ObjectiveThis cross-sectional study aimed to assess the impact of the pandemic on health profession students' educational experiences, determine the association between their self-reported resilience and psychological distress and assess group differences between students from different graduate health profession programs in an academic medical center.MethodsGraduate health profession students completed a 44-question online survey and the 10-item Connor Davidson Resilience Scale (CD-RISC-10) during the COVID-19 pandemic period between January-March 2021. We used descriptive statistics, independent samples t test, Related-samples Wilcoxon signed rank test, Pearson correlations test and Analysis of variance (ANOVA) to analyze the data.ResultsMajority of respondents reported that COVID-19 had a negative impact on their education and caused a reduction in educational opportunities (76.6% and 73% respectively). Majority also reported feeling burned out, lonely/isolated, or frustrated by COVID-19 restrictions (70.0%, 67.4%, and 61.8% respectively). Students reported increased use of both avoidant and adaptive coping strategies during the pandemic. Higher resilience scores were associated with higher self-reported stress, fewer burnout symptoms, and better overall well-being.ConclusionThe COVID-19 pandemic significantly affected students in graduate health profession programs. Instructional quality, educational opportunities, institutional trust, peer socialization, and personal health and wellbeing were perceived to be negatively impacted. Students may require additional support and resources from their training programs to mitigate these concerns. Future studies should evaluate the long-term impact of the COVID-19 pandemic among pandemic-era graduate health profession students.

Project description:BackgroundThe emerging novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has become one of the leading cause of deaths worldwide in 2020. The present systematic review and meta-analysis estimated the magnitude of sleep problems during the COVID-19 pandemic and its relationship with psychological distress.MethodsFive academic databases (Scopus, PubMed Central, ProQuest, ISI Web of Knowledge, and Embase) were searched. Observational studies including case-control studies and cross-sectional studies were included if relevant data relationships were reported (i.e., sleep assessed utilizing the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index or Insomnia Severity Index). All the studies were English, peer-reviewed papers published between December 2019 and February 2021. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42020181644.Findings168 cross-sectional, four case-control, and five longitudinal design papers comprising 345,270 participants from 39 countries were identified. The corrected pooled estimated prevalence of sleep problems were 31% among healthcare professionals, 18% among the general population, and 57% among COVID-19 patients (all p-values < 0.05). Sleep problems were associated with depression among healthcare professionals, the general population, and COVID-19 patients, with Fisher's Z scores of -0.28, -0.30, and -0.36, respectively. Sleep problems were positively (and moderately) associated with anxiety among healthcare professionals, the general population, and COVID-19 patients, with Fisher's z scores of 0.55, 0.48, and 0.49, respectively.InterpretationSleep problems appear to have been common during the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. Moreover, sleep problems were found to be associated with higher levels of psychological distress. With the use of effective programs treating sleep problems, psychological distress may be reduced. Vice versa, the use of effective programs treating psychological distress, sleep problems may be reduced.FundingThe present study received no funding.