MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3116148098 · doi:10.1681/asn.20203110s1305c

The Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on the Mental Health of Health Workers Treating Patients with Kidney Diseases in Latin America (LA): Analysis from GlomCon Latin America Working Group (LGlomCon)

2020· article· en· W3116148098 on OpenAlexaff
Sonia Rodríguez Ramírez, Franco H. Cabeza Rivera, Julio A. Gutierrez-Prieto, Javier Soto-Vargas, Blanca Martinez-Chagolla, Denisse Arellano-Mendez, Diana Aguirre, Desiree Garcia Anton, Carmen Ávila-Casado

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American Society of Nephrology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicCOVID-19 and Mental Health
Canadian institutionsUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPandemicHealth careLatin AmericansMedicineTimelineMetadataFamily medicineCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Computer scienceWorld Wide WebPolitical scienceDiseaseGeographyPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: The rapid spread of the COVID-19 pandemic into LA countries where health systems were already facing major limitations might further challenge their physician’s emotional and mental wellbeing. We aimed to describe the perception of health workers managing kidney diseases in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: Descriptive analysis extracted from an online survey carried out among nephrologists, renal pathologists, and other health workers treating kidney diseases between May 20-27, 2020 from sixteen Spanish speaking Latin American countries divided into 6 categories. We present the results for the mental health category. Results: 430 responses were obtained of which 360 (84%) were considered for analysis. The participants were mainly nephrologists 276 (86%), renal pathologists 13 (4%), and physicians in training 11 (3%). Ages ranged between 30-49 years old in 271 (75%), mostly working on tertiary centers 258 (71%). 329 (90%) participated in inpatient care. 277 (86%) considered that the COVID-19 pandemic has impacted their mental health. Prevailing symptoms were anxiety, insomnia, and depression, with 75.2%, 42.5%, and 18.2%, respectively. Physical or verbal violence from the community was reported by 18 (5%) of the participants because they were seen as a source of viral transmission. 179 (55%) considered personal protective equipment (PPE) was sufficiently provided and 275 (79%) had to invest up to 20% of their income to obtain PPE. In addition, 144 (44%) of the respondents reported a shortage of COVID-19 tests and only 99 (30%) felt their hospital was well equipped to care for COVID-19 patients. 126 (39%) of the health workers responded that they received adequate training, while 105 (32%) endorsed they did not feel prepared in the management of patients with COVID-19. Conclusions: This survey reveals the considerable impact that the COVID-19 pandemic is generating among physicians treating patients with kidney diseases in LA. Possible aggravating factors also found in our survey included lack of testing, PPE availability, and overall hospital preparedness. Funding: Private Foundation Support

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

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.039

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.044
GPT teacher head0.370
Teacher spread0.326 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the American Society of Nephrology→Same topicCOVID-19 and Mental Health→French-language works237,207→