Impact of Omicron Wave and Associated Infection Prevention and Control Measures in Shanghai on Health Management and Psychosocial Well-Being of Patients with Chronic Conditions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background COVID-19 and associated controls may be particularly problematic in the context of chronic conditions. This study investigated health management, well-being, and pandemic-related perspectives in these patients in the context of stringent measures, and associated correlates. Methods A self-report survey was administered via Wenjuanxing in Simplified Chinese between March-June 2022 during the Omicron wave lockdown in Shanghai, China. Items from the Somatic Symptom Scale (SSS) and Symptom Checklist-90 (SCL-90) were administered, as well as pandemic-related items created by a working group of the Chinese Preventive Medical Association. Chronic disease patients in this cross-sectional study were recruited through an associated community family physician group. Results Overall, 1775 patients, mostly married females with hypertension, participated. Mean SSS scores were 36.1±10.5/80, with 41.5% scoring in the elevated range (i.e., above 36). In an adjusted model, female, diagnosis of coronary artery disease and arrhythmia, perceived impact of pandemic on life, duration can tolerate control measures, perception of future & control measures, impact of pandemic on health condition and change to exercise routine due to pandemic were significantly associated with greater distress. Approximately one-quarter (24.5%) perceived the pandemic had a permanent impact on their life, and 44.1% perceived at least a minor impact on their health. One-third (33.5%) discontinued exercise due to the pandemic. While 47.6% stocked up on their medications before the lockdown, their remaining supply was mostly only enough for a couple of weeks and 17.5% of participants discontinued use. Chief among their fears were inability to access healthcare (83.2%), and what they stated they most needed to manage their condition was medication access (65.6%). Conclusions Since 2020 when we assessed a similar cohort, distress and perceived impact of the pandemic has worsened. Greater access to cardiac rehabilitation in China could address these issues.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".