Impact of COVID– 19 on the Psychological Health of Dental Professionals: A Systematic Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: An outbreak of novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19), has influenced every aspect of life. Healthcare workers, especially dentists, are at a high risk of getting infected due to close contact with patients Aim: to identify factors that can affect the psychological health of dental professionals during the COVID – 19 pandemic. METHOD: This systematic review was conducted for the full-text English articles focusing in the field of dentistry, specifically looking at the impact of COVID – 19 on the psychological health of dental professionals, from January 1st 2020 to April 1st 2021. RESULTS: A total of 677 papers were retrieved, reduced to 136 following removal of duplicates. The abstracts were screened using the eligibility criteria, and 52 were found to match the criteria. After screening the full-text articles, 32 were excluded, resulting in a total of 20 studies. The significant findings and conclusions from these studies were extracted and grouped under themes. CONCLUSION: The 3 major factors responsible for affecting the psychological health of dental professionals during the COVID – 19 pandemic include: fear of contagion, subjective overload, and perceived job insecurity and loss of income. There is a need for countries to enact measures that ensure positive mental wellbeing of dental professionals, so that they do not take any adverse action or decisions. Furthermore, should another pandemic or viral outbreak occur in the future, policies and strategies designed and implemented, will ensure dental professionals continue to deliver service without significant psychological distress.
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 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 | 0.019 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| 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, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".