MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4383371013 · doi:10.7759/cureus.41447

Exploring the Mental Health Challenges of Emergency Medicine and Critical Care Professionals: A Comprehensive Review and Meta-Analysis

2023· review· en· W4383371013 on OpenAlex
Tarek Ibrahim, Amr Gebril, Mohammed K Nasr, Abdul Samad, Hany A Zaki

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueCureus · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealthcare professionals’ stress and burnout
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineBurnoutDepersonalizationMeta-analysisConfidence intervalEmotional exhaustionOdds ratioCritical appraisalHealth careDepression (economics)Family medicineMental healthMEDLINEEmergency departmentNursingPsychiatryAlternative medicineInternal medicineClinical psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Burnout and depression are global problems affecting healthcare providers, especially those working in stressful departments such as emergency departments (EDs) and critical care units (CCUs). However, pooled data analysis comparing healthcare providers operating in the ED and CCU is yet to be conducted. Therefore, this meta-analysis was systematically conducted to investigate and compare the prevalence of burnout and depression among emergency medicine (EM) and critical care medicine (CCM) professionals. We systematically searched for articles related to our research topic using the database search method and manual search method, which involved reviewing the reference lists of articles from electronic databases for additional studies. After screening the literature from the databases using the eligibility criteria, a quality appraisal using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale was performed on the eligible studies. In addition, a meta-analysis using the Review Manager software was performed to investigate the prevalence rates of burnout and depression. A total of 10 studies with 1,353 EM and 1,250 CCM professionals were included for analysis in the present study. The pooled analysis did not establish any considerable differences between EM and CCM healthcare workers on the prevalence of high emotional exhaustion (EE) (odds ratio (OR) = 1.01; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.46-2.19; p = 0.98), high depersonalization (OR = 1.16; 95% CI = 0.61-2.21; p = 0.64), low personal accomplishment (PA) (OR = 0.87; 95% CI = 0.67 - 1.12; p = 0.28), and depression (OR = 1.20; 95% CI = 0.74-1.95; p = 0.45). Moreover, pooled data showed no considerable differences in EE scores (mean difference (MD) = -1.07; 95% CI = -4.24-2.09; p = 0.51) and depersonalization scores (MD = -0.31; 95% CI = -1.35-0.73; p = 0.56). However, EM healthcare workers seemed to have considerably lower PA scores than their CCM counterparts (MD = 0.12; 95% CI = 0.08-0.16; p < 0.00001). No considerable difference was recorded in the prevalence of burnout and depression between EM and CCM healthcare workers. However, our findings suggest that EM professionals have lower PA scores than CCM professionals; therefore, more attention should be paid to the mental health of EM professionals to improve their PA.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.760
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0080.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.783
GPT teacher head0.620
Teacher spread0.164 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it