Hair cortisol change at COVID-19 pandemic onset predicts burnout among health personnel
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has put chronic pressure on worldwide healthcare systems. While the literature regarding the prevalence of psychological distress and associated risk factors among healthcare workers facing COVID-19 has exploded, biological variables have been mostly overlooked. METHODS: 467 healthcare workers from Quebec, Canada, answered an electronic survey covering various risk factors and mental health outcomes three months after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. Of them, 372 (80%) provided a hair sample, providing a history of cortisol secretion for the three months preceding and following the pandemic's start. We used multivariable regression models and a receiver operating characteristic curve to study hair cortisol as a predictor of burnout and psychological health, together with individual, occupational, social, and organizational factors. RESULTS: As expected, hair cortisol levels increased after the start of the pandemic, with a median relative change of 29% (IQR = 3-59%, p < 0.0001). There was a significant association between burnout status and change in cortisol, with participants in the second quarter of change having lower odds of burnout. No association was found between cortisol change and post-traumatic stress disorder, anxiety, and depression symptoms. Adding cortisol to individual-occupational-socio-organizational factors noticeably enhanced our burnout logistic regression model's predictability. CONCLUSION: Change in hair cortisol levels predicted burnout at three months in health personnel at the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. This non-invasive biological marker of the stress response could be used in further clinical or research initiatives to screen high-risk individuals to prevent and control burnout in health personnel facing an important stressor.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".