Suicidal Ideation of Healthcare Workers During COVID-19: An Ecological Momentary Assessment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: The COVID-19 pandemic had an impact on the psychological health of healthcare workers (HCWs). Cross-sectional studies report suicidal ideation in this population during this period, but no longitudinal study has examined the evolution of these ideas over time. Objectives: To assess the evolution of suicidal ideation of HCWs during the first two waves of the COVID-19 pandemic among Quebec (Canada) HCWs and to identify the risk factors involved. Methods: A longitudinal study among Quebec (Canada) HCWs using ecological momentary assessment was conducted between May 8, 2020, and March 31, 2021 (corresponding to the second half of the first wave to the end of the second). Participants (n=865) answered weekly questions related to anxiety (GAD-7), depression (PHQ-9), suicidal ideation (PHQ-9 Q.9), exposure to COVID-19, exposure to COVID-19-related deaths, their infection status and that of their co-workers and loved ones, as well as the amount of time they spent consuming news related to COVID-19. Results: Proportion of suicidal ideation increased from May to June 2020 (second half of the first wave) peaking at 18% before declining up to March 2021. Anxiety and depression symptoms severity increased those ideations as well as having a colleague confirmed positive to COVID-19. Social support does not appear to be a protective factor for suicidal ideation. Suicidal thoughts are associated with media consumption and appear to be mediated by the presence of clinical distress expressed as depressive or anxiety states. Discussion and conclusion: Media consumption in a pandemic context is associated with anxiety and depression, the more severe states of which may express suicidal ideation. Without inferring causality relationship, it seems advisable for HCWs to limit their media exposure during a disaster such as a 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 | 0.005 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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".