Effects of COVID-19 on Healthcare Providers: Opportunities for Education and Support (ECHOES)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Healthcare providers (HCPs) working at point of care with patients have experienced health-, home- and work-related stressors from the COVID-19 pandemic. The magnitude and duration of the pandemic pose particular challenges for nursing leadership, and there is little research to guide them during this unprecedented time. This study was designed to explore how the pandemic influences HCP well-being, professional practice, inter-professional collaboration and the education and supports that would assist them during the pandemic recovery period. The article reports on the qualitative portion of a mixed-methods study, which included 56 HCPs who work in a large mental healthcare facility in Ontario. Witnessing the impact of the pandemic restrictions on patients was a significant source of stress for HCPs. HCPs recommended strategies, such as learning new therapeutic modalities and participating in the redesign of health services as key strategies to support them during the pandemic as these would promote patient well-being. Lastly, the pandemic provided opportunities for HCPs to deepen their understanding of other professions. This awareness was viewed as a strength that could support interprofessional collaboration and enhance health services redesign. The findings and recommendations can assist leaders to address the mental health challenges arising from the pandemic.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".