Prevalence of anxiety and depressive symptoms among physicians during the COVID-19 pandemic in Bangladesh: a cross-sectional study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: In addition to risking their physical well-being, frontline physicians are enduring significant emotional burden both at work and home during the COVID-19 pandemic. This study aims to investigate the levels of anxiety and depressive symptoms and to identify associated factors among Bangladeshi physicians during the COVID-19 outbreak. METHODS AND DESIGN: A cross-sectional study using an online survey was conducted between April 21 and May 10, 2020. Outcomes assessed included demographic questions, COVID-19 related questions, and the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS). RESULTS: The survey was completed by 412 Bangladeshi physicians. The findings revealed that, in terms of standardized HADS cut-off points, the prevalence of anxiety and depressive symptoms among physicians was 67.72% and 48.5% respectively. Risk factors for higher rates of anxiety or depressive symptoms were: being female, physicians who had experienced COVID-19 like symptoms during the pandemic, those who had not received incentives, those who used self-funded PPE, not received adequate training, lacking perceived self-efficacy to manage COVID -19 positive patients, greater perceived stress of being infected, fear of getting assaulted/humiliated, being more connected with social media, having lower income levels to support the family, feeling more agitated, less than 2 hours of leisure activity per day and short sleep duration. All these factors were found to be positively associated with anxiety and depression in unadjusted and adjusted statistical models. CONCLUSIONS: This study identifies a real concern about the prevalence of anxiety and depressive symptoms among Bangladeshi physicians and identifies several associated factors during the COVID-19 pandemic. Given the vulnerability of the physicians in this extraordinary period whilst they are putting their own lives at risk to help people infected by COVID-19, health authorities should address the psychological needs of medical staff and formulate effective strategies to support vital frontline health workers. STHRENGHTS & LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY: This study reports a novel and concerning findings on the prevalence of anxiety and depression symptoms with identification of several important associated factors among Bangladeshi physicians during the COVID-19 pandemic.The cross-sectional nature of the study design could not establish causal relationship between the dependent and independent variables.This study was carried out by conducting a web-based survey, which might generate sampling bias by excluding the physicians who do not have access to internet or inactive in social medias, and thus limit the generalizability of the findings.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Direct model labels (unvalidated)
Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.
| Model arm | Categories | Study design | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| gemma | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Observational | low |
| gpt | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Observational | low |
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedLabeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".